The Correlation Between Criminal and Civil Law Norms in Practical Activities on Against Property Crimes Cases (by Example of Embezzlement)

The article examines some aspects of the correlation of criminal and civil law norms in law enforcement activities in cases of crimes against property (using the example of embezzlement). N. S. Tagantsev divided all theories about the fundamental difference between criminal and civil falsehoods into three groups: subjective, objective and mixed. The rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on cases of embezzlement reflect a subjective theory. Decision-making on specific cases is based on objective information. The delineation of the subjects and methods of legal regulation of criminal and civil law determines their relationship. If we assume that criminal law is a protective branch, and civil law is a regulatory branch, then the norms of civil law should take precedence. Civil law, which regulates property relations, distinguishes between contractual obligations and tort obligations, and also contains the institution of invalid transactions. There can be no single principle of interaction between criminal and civil law for various legal relations. For contractual obligations, the rules of civil law should be applied first. In the case of tort obligations and invalid transactions, the interaction between criminal and civil law, as well as the resolution of competition between rules of different branches, should be different.