The convicted person is additionally punished by deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities, where he was found guilty of knowingly giving false testimony.
By the verdict of the District Court No. 2 of the Saryarkinsky district of Astana dated March 18, 2014: Zh., convicted under part one of Article 352 of the Criminal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) to a fine of 100 monthly calculation indices (hereinafter referred to as MCI) in the amount of 185,200 tenge. By the verdict of the court of J. He was found guilty of knowingly giving false testimony. By the decision of the Appellate Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Astana City Court dated April 25, 2014, the verdict of the court was changed: based on Article 41 of the Criminal Code. An additional penalty was imposed in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities for a period of 3 years. By the decision of the Cassation Judicial Board of the Astana City Court dated June 26, 2014, the verdict of the court and the decision of the appellate instance remained unchanged. Having studied the arguments of the convicted person's petition and the materials of the criminal case, the Supervisory Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan granted the petition on the following grounds.
The convicted person is additionally punished by deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities, where he was found guilty of knowingly giving false testimony.
The court's conclusions on J.'s guilt The circumstances stated in the verdict are correct in the crime charged against him, and are based on the totality of evidence examined during the main trial and are not disputed by the convicted person himself. At the same time, one cannot agree with the conclusions of the appellate instance on the imposition of additional punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities for a period of 3 years. As can be seen from the materials of the case, Zh., carrying out real estate valuation activities, in the framework of a civil case on the compulsory seizure of a land plot for state needs, compiled a report No. 24- 03/12 dated 03.03.2012 on the valuation of a land plot, taking into account the cost of non-existent housing and green spaces. Subsequently, during the consideration of civil case No. 2-1229, the unreliability of this report was established in court. According to the materials of the civil case attached to the criminal case, namely the protocol of the trial dated April 10, 2013, J. in court, he was questioned as a witness on the fact and circumstances of his departure to inspect the land owned by G. and it was established that the latter went to inspect the land not with the owner, but with his representative by proxy. Zh. gave false testimony, saying that the assessment was conducted with the owner of the land. The authorities of the preliminary investigation charged him with having knowingly drawn up a false expert opinion and given knowingly false testimony of a witness in prior agreement with unknown persons. However, the court found him guilty only of giving deliberately false testimony as a witness. In such circumstances, the judicial board considers that the actions of J. According to the first part of Article 352 of the Criminal Code, they are qualified correctly, however, the imposition of additional punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities for a period of 3 years is inconsistent with the norms of the Criminal Code and paragraph 28 of the Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On the observance by courts of legality in the imposition of criminal punishment" dated April 30, 1999 No. 1. Based on the above, guided by paragraph 2 of the fifth part of Article 467 of the CPC, the Supervisory Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan amended the decisions of the Appellate Judicial Board for Criminal cases dated April 25, 2014 and the Cassation Judicial Board of the Astana City Court dated June 26, 2014 in respect of Zh. An additional penalty of deprivation of the right to engage in property valuation activities for a period of 3 years was excluded from the decision of the appellate judicial board. The verdict of the court of the district court No. 2 of the Saryarkinsky district of Astana dated March 18, 2014 remained unchanged.
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
