Deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity is established by law for a period of one to ten years.

By the verdict of the court No. 2 of Aktobe, Aktobe region, dated February 16, 2017, N., who had no previous criminal record, was sentenced under paragraph 2 of part 4 of Article 189 of the Criminal Code to 7 years in prison with confiscation of property personally belonging to her, with life imprisonment for the right to hold financially responsible positions in government and commercial organizations, and to serve her sentence in a correctional facility. general regime colonies. In accordance with paragraph 2 of part 1 of Article 4 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amnesty in connection with the twenty-fifth anniversary of Independence of the Republic of Kazakhstan" dated December 13, 2016, the unserved part of the sentence was reduced by half and 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment were determined to be served with confiscation of property personally belonging to her, with lifetime deprivation of the right to hold financially responsible positions. positions in government and commercial organizations, with sentences served in a general regime penal colony. On the basis of article 74 of the Criminal Code, the serving of a custodial sentence was postponed for one year. The fate of the physical evidence is resolved in accordance with the requirements of Article 118 of the CPC. By the verdict of the court, N. was found guilty of the fact that in the period from November 10, 2014 to April 1, 2015, while working as an accountant in the branch of NPO Z LLP, being a financially responsible person, using her official position, for selfish reasons, by embezzlement, she committed theft of the property entrusted to her by NPO Z LLP.NGO "Z" in a particularly large amount, in the amount of KZT 7,595,678.

Deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity is established by law for a period of one to ten years.

By the decision of the judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Aktobe Regional Court dated April 5, 2017, the verdict of the court against the convicted N. remained unchanged. The court's conclusions on the evidence of N.'s guilt in committing the crime for which she was convicted, in the circumstances specified in the verdict, are based on a set of evidence, in accordance with the requirements of Article 24 of the CPC, comprehensively, fully and objectively examined at the court session. The guilt of the convicted N. the commission of the criminal acts incriminated to her is confirmed by the testimony of the victim's representative K., witnesses T., B., L., K., D., G., expert A., the conclusions of the audit, additional forensic economic expertise and other evidence examined in court. There are no grounds to consider these proofs unreliable and unacceptable, they were obtained in compliance with the requirements of the law. The arguments of the convicted person on the recognition of the conclusion of an additional forensic economic examination as inadmissible as evidence are untenable, since there are no violations of the criminal procedure law entailing the recognition of evidence as inadmissible. The expert opinion is based on factual data as a result of a study of the case materials, namely the originals of primary cash documents, cash orders, cash books, an inventory report on cash withdrawal from the cash register, as well as the 1C database program, and is consistent with the conclusions of the audit report dated December 7, 2015. The Court evaluated and analyzed all the evidence examined in court, presented by the prosecution and the defense in their entirety. The court examined the evidence presented in the verdict, in accordance with the requirements of article 125 of the CPC, compared them with each other and evaluated each of them in terms of relevance, admissibility and reliability.

The analysis of the evidence underlying the verdict is described in detail by the court in the verdict and refutes the arguments of the petition for innocence and that the court's conclusions are based on inadmissible evidence. In such circumstances, the court of first instance reasonably concluded that N.'s guilt had been proven and correctly qualified her actions under paragraph 2 of part 4 of Article 189 of the Criminal Code. The penalty imposed by the court verdict complies with the requirements of the criminal law, which defines the general principles of sentencing, it is proportionate to the deed, the identity of the perpetrator and is fair. When assigning the amount of punishment, the court takes into account all the circumstances affecting responsibility and punishment. In accordance with the law, an additional mandatory penalty has been imposed in the form of confiscation of property. At the same time, when imposing additional punishment in the form of life imprisonment for the right to hold financially responsible positions in government and commercial organizations, the court violated the law. In accordance with article 50 of the Criminal Code, which regulates the conditions for the imposition of punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity, his appointment is provided for life for certain categories of crimes directly listed in the content of the article: corruption crimes, certain categories of economic crimes, as well as crimes against the sexual integrity of minors or minors.  The crime for which N. was convicted does not belong to these categories, and therefore she cannot be given additional punishment in the form of life imprisonment for the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity, despite the fact that it is provided for by the sanction of the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code. Taking into account the above, when determining the conditions and procedure for the appointment of this additional punishment, one should be guided by the general conditions for its appointment given in part 2 of Article 50 of the Criminal Code, according to which deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity is established by law for a period of one to ten years. When considering whether to impose additional punishment on the convicted person, the judicial board takes into account that the criminal acts were committed by N. Using a financially responsible position, these actions were aimed at embezzling the funds at their disposal. Based on the above, the Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court amended the judicial acts of the local courts in respect of N. and canceled the appointment of N. additional punishment in the form of life imprisonment of the right to hold financially responsible positions in government and commercial organizations. Appointed by N. additional punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold financially responsible positions in government and commercial organizations for a period of 10 years. The rest of the judicial acts remained unchanged. The petition of the convicted N. was partially satisfied. 

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases