Уголовное законодательство зарубежных стран о мошеннических посягательствах на собственность и законные интересы кредитных учреждений

Abstract

We consider legislative problems of regulating liability for fraud in the field of lending. We conduct a comparative analysis of the provisions of the criminal legislation of foreign countries for credit fraud that infringes on the property and legitimate interests of credit institutions. We note that German criminal law provides for liability for crimes of fraud and abuse of con-fidence for criminal purposes. A feature of the German language is in this case the interpretation of the concept of “credit fraud” as “fraud”, the most correct in this case, the name of fraud in the field of credit will be as “credit fraud”. We analyze the controversial nature of the object of this crime within the framework of German criminal law and the concept of credit is given, which made it possible to conclude that the rule that ensures combating fraud in the credit sector is limited in its application exclusively to the sphere of lending. Based on the analysis of the signs of the objective side of fraudulent encroachments in the field of lending, it was concluded that the composition of credit fraud is formal. Investigative practice shows that when establishing guilt, certain difficulties arise in practice. The norm on credit fraud is characterized in criminal law as saturated with vague, evaluative signs, for example, the concept of “economy or enterprise”, “incorrectness” of documents and written information, their “significance” for making a decision on a loan. For a comparative analysis, the subject of the study was also taken the criminal law on credit fraud of the CIS member states. In the course of the analysis of the provisions of the criminal legislation of the CIS member states, it was concluded that there is no unambiguity in the formulation of the disposition of the rules on credit fraud among the member countries. Thus, the criminal legislation in matters of criminalization of fraud in the field of lending in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan tends more to the Russian one, while in Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, a tendency has been revealed that the norms are close to the criminal legislation of Germany. A study of the English and Australian court practice in criminal cases in the field of lending allows us to conclude that the temporary borrowing of credit funds qualifies as gratuitous fraudulent encroachment in the credit sector. US criminal law provides for liability for credit fraud as part of the general fraud rule.