{"id":2112,"date":"2024-11-17T09:08:25","date_gmt":"2024-11-17T07:08:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2024\/11\/case-no-947-27382-21-dated-07-11-2024\/"},"modified":"2024-11-17T09:08:25","modified_gmt":"2024-11-17T07:08:25","slug":"case-no-947-27382-21-dated-07-11-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2024\/11\/case-no-947-27382-21-dated-07-11-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 947\/27382\/21 dated 07\/11\/2024"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Appealing the verdict against a person convicted of stealing communication cables and damaging telecommunication networks. The court was guided by the following arguments: 1) According to the new Law No. 3886-IX dated 18.07.2024, theft of property valued at less than 2,270 UAH has been decriminalized and is now considered an administrative offense; 2) Since the value of stolen property in each episode was less than this amount, conviction under theft articles (Art. 185 of the Criminal Code) is subject to cancellation; 3) At the same time, punishment for damaging telecommunication networks (Art. 360 of the Criminal Code) remains in force, as these actions continue to be criminally punishable. Court Decision: Partially satisfy the cassation appeal &#8211; cancel the conviction for theft, but maintain the punishment of 3 years of imprisonment for damaging telecommunication networks.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/122963323\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Appealing the verdict against a person convicted of stealing communication cables and damaging telecommunication networks. The court was guided by the following arguments: 1) According to the new Law No. 3886-IX dated 18.07.2024, theft of property valued at less than 2,270 UAH has been decriminalized and is now considered an administrative offense;&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[57,42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2112","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-court-practice-ukraine","category-eu-legislation-important","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2112","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2112"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2112\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2112"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2112"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2112"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}