Concept of misappropriation and embezzlement of entrusted property right

2000 m. priimtas naujas Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamasis kodeksas (toliau BK) įtvirtino naują nuostatą, pagal kurią pasisavinimo (183 str.) ir iššvaistymo (184 str.) dalyku gali būti ne tik patikėtas ar kaltininko žinioje esantis turtas, bet ir turtinė teisė. Šis įstatymo leidėjo žingsnis sudarė prielaidas plačiau traktuoti šių nusikalstamų veikų objektą, kitaip aiškinti galimus jų padarymo būdus. Kriminalizavus patikėtų turtinių teisių pasisavinimą ir iššvaistymą turi būti sukurta ir atitinkama mokslinė doktrina. Kol kas šių veikų padarymo mechanizmas nėra tinkamai atskleistas Lietuvos baudžiamosios teisės teorijoje, o tuo labiau teismų praktikoje. Šis straipsnis ir yra bandymas formuoti patikėtos turtinės teisės pasisavinimo ir iššvaistymo kaip nusikalstamų veikų koncepcinį supratimą, nes be jo negali būti vienodo šių normų taikymo teismų praktikoje.The Criminal Code of Republic of Lithuania (2000) provides for a new concept, under which the subject-matter of crimes of misappropriation (Art. 183) and embezzlement (Art. 184) is not limited to entrusted material property, but also includes an entrusted property right. Formerly Lithuanian criminal law included a property right identifying elements of such crimes as fraud and extortion. Identifying elements of fraud and extortion the Lithuanian criminal law traditionally included only a property right. The rationale behind this choice was that the purpose of these crimes was not only the physical seizure of a material thing, but also gain of another property. The new Criminal Code has expanded this approach into crimes of misappropriation and embezzlement, where the trustee can also illegally affect immaterial asset of the owner. The new step is also in line with the criminal law tradition, which understands the notion of property narrowly, as a material thing. That is why the notion of property right by which the norms of misappropriation and embezzlement are supplemented expands the scope of those crimes and strengthens legal protection of property in general. The author concludes that the notion of entrusted property right encompasses all rights deriving from immovable things, obligations, intellectual products and any other immaterial things recognized by civil law, including securities and financial deposit accounts. Only the right related to a material movable thing does not accord with the notion of property right because it is a material thing. The author also discusses the possible ways, in which the property right can be misappropriated, and criteria, which identify the unlawfulness of such actions. Misappropriation of entrusted property right is considered as illegal (exceeding one's powers) and gratuitous action as a result of which the perpetrator legally becomes the proprietor of another's property right, thus getting an opportunity to unlawfully benefit from it. Embezzlement of entrusted property right is understood as its illegal transfer to the third parties, its the legal termination or depreciation. The reason to to consider embezzlement of the entrusted property rights illegal, especially in the field of business, is the obvious violation of economic interests of the proprietor. If there are doubts on this account, the interests of the victim should be protected by means of civil procedure, abstaining from criminal prosecution