1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal of the appellate court’s judgment regarding PERSON_7, who was found guilty of committing criminal offenses under Part 4 of Article 358, Part 1 of Article 187, and Part 2 of Article 289 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
2. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s judgment, citing a number of violations. The appellate court did not state in the judgment all the factual circumstances of the crime, in particular, the recurrence and state of alcohol intoxication during the illegal seizure of a vehicle. Also, contradictions were found in the judgment between the reasoning and operative parts. The appellate court did not take into account the expiration of the statute of limitations for bringing to criminal responsibility under Part 4 of Article 358 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and did not explain the consequences of this to the accused, which is a violation of the requirements of the criminal procedural law and incorrect application of the law on criminal liability. In addition, the Supreme Court indicated that the punishment imposed by the appellate court within the minimum limits of Part 1 of Article 187 and Part 2 of Article 289 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine should be considered lenient.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s judgment and ordered a new trial in the court of appellate instance, choosing a preventive measure for PERSON_7 in the form of detention for a period of 60 days.
