Controversial issues of the subjective side of the composition of a criminal offense under Art. 187 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine were considered. It is noted that for the characterization of robbery, the subjective side of the commission of this criminal offense is important. As you know, the subjective side of a criminal offense is its inner side, that is, the mental activity of a person, reflecting the attitude of his consciousness and will to the socially dangerous act committed by her and to its consequences.The content of the subjective side of the composition of a criminal offense includes such signs as guilt, motive and purpose of the criminal offense. The main feature that characterizes the subjective side of the act is guilt. It most of all accumulates in itself the signs of the object and the objective side, as in a mirror it reflects how these signs pass through the prism of consciousness and will.It is considered in which cases the criminal offense is considered to be committed intentionally, and in which due to negligence. The opinions of scientists on determining the form of guilt in the formal composition of criminal offenses and specifically robbery are analyzed (Article 187 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).It is concluded that when committing robberies in reality, the person is aware of the socially dangerous nature of the robbery, which consists of two interrelated actions, involves the consequences of both these actions in the form of real events or danger and wants them to occur. Guilt in robbery is characterized by direct intent, the content of which is formed by two points – intellectual and volitional. The intellectual moment contains two features – awareness of the socially dangerous nature of the act and anticipation of socially dangerous consequences.The volitional moment contains one sign – the desire for the onset of socially dangerous consequences provided for by the guilty. In cases of robbery, a person realizes that he seizes or seeks to seize someone else's movable property by open seizure, that he has no right to this property and violates the rules established by the state on the lawful circulation of such property. However, the person is aware that he acts against the will or against the will of the owner, victim or person who was at the scene of the crime, is also aware of the unity of the main and ancillary actions, ie realizes that open or secret seizure it commits or seeks to commit by means of physical violence that is dangerous to the life or health of the victim or the threat of immediate use of such violence. The person also uses physical violence, realizes its open or secret nature, and when using mental violence, realizes that the victim considers the threat as real and as such that if implemented will be dangerous to his life or health.
1. Kudriavtsev V. (1960) Obъektyvnaia storona prestuplenyia. M.: Hosiuryzdat, 244 p. 2. Kryminalne pravo Ukrainy (2004). Zahalna chastyna : pidruch. / za red. M. I. Bazhanova, V. V. Stashysa, V. Ya. Tatsiia. K.: Yurinkom Inter, 480 p. 3. Uholovnoe pravo Ukrayny. (1998) Obshchaia chast. / pod red. M. Y. Bazhanova, V. V. Stashysa, V. Ya. Tatsyia. Kh.: Pravo, 400 p. 4. Raroh A. (1980) Obshchaia teoryia vyny v uholovnom prave. M.: VIuZY, 92 p. 216 Спірні питання суб’єктивної сторони складу кримінального правопорушення… 5. Emelianov V. (2002) Terroryzm y prestuplenyia s pryznakamy terroryzyrovanyia : uholovno-pravovoe yssledovanye. SPb.: Yurydycheskyi tsentr Press, 291 p. 6. Semykin M. (2003) Stvorennia terorystychnoi hrupy chy terorystychnoi orhanizatsii : kryminalno-pravove doslidzhennia. Kh.: Vyd-vo Nats. un-tu vnutr. sprav, 145 p. 7. Kundeus V. (2004) Kryminalno-pravova kharakterystyka vykradennia : dys. kand. yuryd. nauk : 12.00.08 / Kundeus Vladyslav Hennadiiovych. Kh. 198 p. 8. Batyrhareieva V. (2003) Kryminolohichna kharakterystyka ta poperedzhennia rozboiv, poiednanykh z pronyknenniam u zhytlo / Batyrhareieva V. S. Kh.: Odyssei, 256 p. 9. Ehorov V. (2001) Poniatye sostava prestup