Abstract

In conclusion, the crime of forgery is not a symptom of some form of theft of property. It is a piecemeal crime that encroaches on its independent object. For this reason, the method of using the forgery of office in the robbery of other people's property, after the completion of the crime of forgery and theft of the property of others, regardless of whether it was done in the process of its implementation or before its implementation, the actions of the accused should be qualified according to the set of articles on forgery of office and robbery of other people's property.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call