Abstract: The subject of the study is problematic issues related to the concept of the subject of the crime under Article 222.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, namely, an explosive device, and with the assessment of the degree of public danger of objects that have the design features of explosive devices, but are not legally such. To resolve the issue of the relevance of the subject to the subject of Article 222.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a rule, an explosive examination is appointed, however, expert terminology is based on special knowledge in the field of forensic explosives and differs somewhat from legal. The purpose of the work is a detailed study of these inconsistencies in the concepts of an explosive device, an assessment of the degree of public danger of a number of objects that are not explosive devices, but contain an explosive charge and have other design features of explosive devices.
In the course of the study, methods of observation, comparison, analysis of expert practice, current legislation and scientific literature were applied.   The novelty of the research lies in the study of the concept of an explosive device both from a legislative point of view and from the point of view of forensic explosives. According to the results of the study, the necessity of changing the legislative approach to the concept of an explosive device, and revaluation of the degree of public danger of imitation and pyrotechnic devices is argued. Recommendations have been developed to bring the measures of the criminal law fight against illegal trafficking of explosives and explosive devices in line with modern requirements.
The results of the work can be used both in the judicial interpretation of the subject of the crime provided for in Article 222.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and directly by the law enforcement officer when evaluating the conclusions of the explosive expertise.