The dissertation is an independent completed scientific work, which presents the results of the criminal-legal characteristics of the theft, appropriation, extortion by a serviceman of weapons, ammunition, explosives or other combat substances, means of
transportation, military and special equipment or other military property, as well as their possession by fraud or abuse of office.
The historical variability of bringing and establishing criminal liability for kidnapping, appropriation, extortion and other forms of appropriation of military property, which were committed on the territory of modern Ukraine, as well as methodological and theoretical concepts of criminal-legal characteristics are investigated. When using comparative-legal, historical and systematic methods,
positive aspects of the historical variability of the specified act were determined and
proposals were made for further regulation of the specified socially dangerous act. The author states that the legislation of Ukraine of the pre-Soviet and Soviet periods formulated the concepts of separate types of embezzlement and kidnapping, but there
was no general (universal) concept of embezzlement. The legislation of Ukraine during this period of time was mainly focused on the protection of state property, there were special criminal law norms establishing the responsibility of military personnel
(including military officials).
It is emphasized that in domestic literature, some common criminal offenses committed by military personnel are related to violation of the order of military service, and that their consequences harm constant combat readiness. Criminal offenses by military officials against military property also pose a great public danger to military law and order, disrupting the normal operation of the military administration apparatus, especially in wartime.
It has been established that the theft of military property, which is carried out by military personnel using their official position, already based on the definition, has a sign of military illegality, their consequences harm the military law and order, undermine the combat readiness of the troops, and weaken the military security of the state.
Special attention is devoted to the legal analysis of Art. 410 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in which the object, the subject, the objective side, the subject and the subjective side of the criminal offense when committing the actions provided for in the
article under study are summarized with the help of theoretical and empirical methods such as synthesis, systematic and hypothetical analysis.
Using the comparative law method, different compositions of criminal offenses that have common features with the analyzed composition are compared, such as: Art. 185–191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, Art. 364 of the Criminal Code of
Ukraine, Art. 263 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, Art. 308 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, Art. 289 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
The scientific views of various scientists who devoted their works to the problem of military illegality on the territory of Ukraine were studied, and separate works were devoted to the theoretical issues of defining the object, subject, objective side, subject, and subjective side.
The specifics of the object of the criminal offense have been proven, the need for a criminal-legal assessment of encroachments by military personnel when committing embezzlement of military property using official position for additional objects, such as military security and the state’s constant combat readiness, has been substantiated. A detailed study of the specific object of theft – military property was carried out, the criteria for the qualification of stolen thefts were determined depending on the type of military property.
The author proved that any withdrawal of military property from its scope of application, i.e. separation from the performance of combat and training tasks, taking into account its purpose, which consists in ensuring the defense capability of the unit,
inherently causes or creates conditions for causing damage to the combat capability of troops and military security state.
According to a survey conducted by the author as part of his dissertation research, 51.5% of employees of specialized prosecutor’s offices believe that, in addition to property relations, the theft of military property also encroaches on state
security, 82% also indicated the constant combat readiness of a military unit as an object of encroachment, 11.5% – the order of military service. 79.5% of citizens, 93.5% of civilian personnel of military units, 41% of military personnel and 33.7% of
employees of territorial law enforcement agencies singled out the military security of the state as an object of theft of military property by military personnel using their official position.
