Abstract: The subject of the research is the provisions of the criminal law on cybercrime and computer information crimes committed using electronic or telecommunication networks including those on the Internet as well as legal acts and regulations in the fields of information security and information technologies. The aim of the research is to define a circle of actions that can be acknowledged as cybercrime by the Russian law and to develop improvements of the criminal law that would help to differentiate between criminal responsibility for the commitment of crime using information technologies. The researcher analyzes different points of view on the definition of cybercrime and describes features of this kind of crime. The research is based on the systems approach using such methods as logical, dogmatic and comaprative law research methods. By analyzing different points of view and using the systems interpretation of legal provisions, the author comes to the conclusion that cybercrime is a universal term that describes crimes committed with the use of information technologies despite the fact that the legal acts lack a particular definition. The novelty of the research is caused by the fact that the author offers a modern definition of cybercrime that covers all crimes committed using IT technologies. The researcher underlines that there is a certain inconsistence in the legal enforcement of features of the wrongdoing committed with the use of electronic and telecommunication networks including Internet. In order to differentiate between criminal responsibility, the author proves the need to complete all corpus delicti of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federatin that may be committed using information technologies. 

Abstract: The article studies the provisions of the criminal law theory about illegal psychiatric committal, the provisions of criminal legislation imposing liability for it, and the particular provisions of the law regulating the reasons and the procedure of psychiatric treatment in the Russian Federation. Special attention is paid to establishing the persons, participating in the process of hospitalization of a person and criminally liable according to the article 128 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The study is based on the system approach; the author applies the logical, normative-dogmatic and comparative-legal methods of cognition. Using the analysis of various scholars’ views on the nature of the subject of the crime under consideration and the system interpretation of the provisions of specific legislation in the sphere of psychiatric treatment, the author substantiates the conclusion about the special subject of the crime stipulated by the part 1 of the article 128 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, it is unnecessary to mention malfeasance in the part 2 of the mentioned article. The scientific novelty of the study consists in the proposed variant of qualification of actions of the persons, who are not special subjects according to the article 128 of the Criminal Code, but participate in illegal psychiatric committal, for example, the representative of the tutorship and guardianship authority, who doesn’t decide on hospitalization. These persons should be liable as accessories depending on their role in the crime. In the case when a parent or a legal representative asks for illegal psychiatric committal of a person, but the psychiatrist doesn’t decide on hospitalization, the actions of these persons won’t be criminally liable in the case of the absence of the elements of another crime. The conclusions and proposals of the study are interesting for theorists and practitioners.