Objective signs of complicity in a criminal offense

: 160-166
Lviv Polytechnic National University, Institute of Jurisprudence and Psychology

The article is devoted to the analysis of objective signs of complicity in a criminal offense.

Objective signs of syphoning are characterized by: a) kilkic sign; b) a yakic sign; c) a single wrongful deduction for all spying students; d) a causal link between the spitting speakers and a single opposite result. The remaining two signs are indispensable for criminal offenses with a material warehouse.

In practice, all the victims of the problem of alcoholism recognize two main objective signs of alcoholism: a) kilkicnu - the fate of a criminally committed dekilkox (not less than two) subjects; b) yakicnu - the culmination of a criminal offence.

It has been proven that complicity exists only where two or more people take part in a crime, and each of them must be endowed with the signs of a subject of a criminal offense - that is, be an individual, convicted and such that he has reached the age of criminal responsibility. That is why the commission of a single criminal offense by several persons should be considered only the guilty activity of the subjects of a criminal offense.

The content of community as an objective sign of a criminal offense includes: a) the actions of the accomplices themselves, their specificity and interconnectedness, and the totality of functional relationships in the deliberate creation of conditions and directly in the commission of a criminal offense in complicity is a necessary element of consistency and an indicator of the degree of cohesion of the accomplices; b) depending on the nature of the consequences, two types of community can be distinguished: the purposeful activity of several subjects and the side activity of several subjects. The first type is traditional complicity with direct intent, in which each accomplice desires the onset of a common result that is incriminated to each accomplice. The second type is associated with the presence of a side specific or indefinite consequence that is beyond the desired one (this is complicity with indirect intent); c) commonality exists at two levels: the participation of each accomplice in the commission of a criminal offense - simple complicity and the cumulative joint activity of all accomplices - group criminal offenses; d) a causal relationship between the actions of each accomplice and the general unlawful consequence (in criminal offenses with material elements), namely, the unlawful consequences are caused by the joint efforts of all jointly acting accomplices.

1. Matyshevckiy, P. (1972). Ugolovno-pravovaya ohrana sotsialisticheckoy sobctvennocti [Criminal-legal protection of socialist property]. K. : Prosvita. [In Ukrainian].

2. Novits'kiy, G. (2012). Spivuchast' u zlochyni ta prychetnict' do zlochynu za kryminal'nym pravom Ukraí̈ny: problemy kvalifikatsií̈ [Complicity in a crime and involvement in a crime under the criminal law of Ukraine: problems of qualification]. Donets'k : Yugo-Vostok. [In Ukrainian].

3. Tel'nov, P. (1974). Otvetctvennost' za souchactie v prectuplenii [Responsibility for participation in a crime]. M. : Yuridicheskaya literatura. [In Russian].

4. Galiakbarov, P. (1970). Yuridicheckaya pripoda gruppy v ugolovnom prave [Legal nature of the group in criminal law]. Sovetckaya yuctitsiya. №20. Pp. 24-29. [In Russian].

5. Galiakbarov, P. (1980). Kvalifikatsiya gruppovyh prestupleniy [Qualification of group crimes]. M. : Yuridicheskaya literatura, [In Russian].

6. Ivanov, N. (1991). Ponyatiya i formy souchactiya v sovetckom ugolovnom prave [Concepts and forms of participation in Soviet criminal law]. Saratov : Izdatel'stvo Saratovckogo universiteta. [In Russian].

7. Burchak, F. (1986). Souchactie v prestuplenii: sotsial'nye, kriminologicheskie i pravovye problemy [Complicity in a crime: social, criminological and legal problems] : dis… doktora yurid. nauk: 12.00.08. [In Russian].

8. Afinogenov, S. (1991). Souchastie v prectuplenii: ponyatiya, vidy i formy [Participation in a crime: concepts, types and forms] : avtopef. dis... kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.08. [In Russian].

9. Traynin, A. (1941). Uchenie o souchastii [The doctrine of participation]. M. : Yurizdat. [In Russian].

10. Shargorodskiy, M. (1960). Nekotorye voprosy obshchego ucheniya o souchastii [Some questions of the general doctrine of participation]. Pravovedenie. № 1. Pp. 51-57. [In Russian].

11. Malahov, P. (1980). Souchastie v voinskix prestupleniyah v svete obshchego ucheniya po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu [Participation in military crimes in the light of the general doctrine of Soviet criminal law] : avtoref. dis… kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.08. [In Russian].

12. Kovalyov, M. (1999). Souchastie v prestuplenii [Participation in a crime]. Ekaterinburg : Ural'skaya gosudarstvennaya yuridicheskaya akademiya. [In Russian].

13. Kozlov, A. (2001). Souchactie: traditsii i real'noct' [Participation: traditions and reality]. SPb. : Yuridicheckiy tsentr Press. [In Russian].

Marysyukm K. "Objective signs of complicity in a criminal offense." https://science.lpnu.ua/law/all-volumes-and-issues/volume-9-number-234-2022/objective-signs-complicity-criminal-offense