Methods and cases of "forgery of a person" in the Russian Federation

Mishugis-Beker Grigorii Sergeevich Lecturer of the Department of Operational Investigative Activities of the Internal Affairs Bodies of the Far Eastern Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs 680020, Russia, Khabarovsk Krai, Khabarovsk, lane. Barracks, 15 mishugis@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Methods and cases of "forgery of a person" [in the previous article [1], we argued in detail this concept, which we mean the use of other people's documents or personal data for a socially dangerous illegal purpose] in the Russian Federation. Several circumstances prompted us to consider various cases of "forgery of a person". The first is due to the fact that "forgery of a person" in the Russian Federation is not punishable and offenders use it. The second circumstance is determined by the first and consists in the fact that in most cases, the "forgery of a person" is socially dangerous violation of the inalienable rights and freedoms of persons, and basically the right to a name. At the same time, we have not found publications or monographic studies classifying cases of illegal use of other people's documents or personal data. So, it seems to us that for a more detailed study of the gap in the legislation, which consists in the absence of punishment for the illegal use of other people's documents and personal data, cases of "forgery of a person" must be classified and differentiated according to the method of gratuitous seizure and (or) circulation of someone else's document in favor of the perpetrator or other persons. In our opinion, there are 3 ways to take possession of someone else's document: 1) Illegal, i.e. any method punishable in accordance with the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. In our opinion, it is necessary to consider the methods of illegal seizure of documents from arbitrariness, since this method does not explicitly relate to the illegal seizure of a passport. Arbitrariness is provided for in Articles 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and 19.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The compositions of these illegal acts are distinguished by the materiality of the harm. Significant harm can be expressed in causing material damage, violation of constitutional rights and freedoms, etc. As it seems to us, due to the lack of a methodology for determining the materiality of harm in arbitrariness and considering the materiality of harm in each individual case, based on the opinion of a judge, unambiguously answer the question of whether there is materiality of harm in the seizure of documents in connection with the alleged right to property is not possible. But it seems to us that by referring to legislation and judicial practice, we can "closer" consider the above-mentioned issue. So, in accordance with the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2002 No. 29 "On judicial practice in cases of theft, robbery, robbery" (with amendments and additions), where paragraph 7 clarifies: "Illegal actions aimed at seizing other people's property do not form part of theft and robbery for a selfish purpose, and for example, for the purpose of its temporary use with subsequent return to the owner or in connection with the alleged right to property. Depending on the circumstances of the case, such actions, if there are grounds for it, are subject to qualification under Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation or other articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation"^[2]. But is it punishable to take possession of a passport not for the purpose of appealing in one's favor, but in connection with the alleged right to property? To try to answer this question, let us turn to judicial practice under Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 19.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. So, in Bugulma, the Republic of Tatarstan, in 2009, person A, together with person B, being sure that person C owed person A money, entered the apartment of person B. Person A took possession, with the threat of violence (he would burn her and the house), belonging to person B, an internal passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation for the name of person B, as a guarantor of the refund of money to person A. During the trial, it was established that person A took the passport from person B not for the purpose of appealing in his favor, but for the purpose of forcing repayment of the debt. The materiality of the harm, as it seems, was expressed in violation of ch. 21 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which states that no one should be subjected to torture, violence, or other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment. The court found that it is necessary to exclude from the charge Article 325 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as unnecessarily imputed and to qualify all actions of person A in aggregate under Part 2 of Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as arbitrariness with the threat of violence. The verdict of this court was appealed by the Cassation Ruling of the Supreme Court, but was left unchanged^[3]. Having analyzed this court decision, we concluded that it is possible to be punishable for self-imposed passport seizure, subject to violation of Part 2, Article 21 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, however, in our opinion, the materiality of harm in self-imposed passport seizure is also possible when the injured person, for example, finds himself in a situation of inability to realize his socially significant guarantees provided for by the Constitution, since the implementation requires the presentation of a passport, namely, a person cannot find a job, vote in elections, receive medical care, cannot purchase a ticket at the station ticket office or issue other documents with state bodies (divorce, birth of children, etc.), and the offender knows about the desire of the injured person to realize your rights. So, it can be assumed that persons A and B are husband and wife, but after a year of living together, person B wants to divorce and move to another city to his parents. Person A takes the passport from person B, thereby preventing the implementation of her socially significant guarantees provided for by the Constitution, namely, to purchase a ticket at the station ticket office, arrange a divorce, and seek medical care. Suppose that person B, against the background of psychological experiences, became ill with SARS. The harm seems to be significant in this case. Provided that the materiality of the harm is recognized by the injured person, who, by necessity, was unable to exercise his rights, continuing to live together with person A, before contacting law enforcement agencies. But, unfortunately, we have not found any confirmation of these assumptions in judicial practice. Next, we turn to judicial practice under Article 19.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. In 2012, in Yarovoye, Altai Territory, person A, while in the apartment of person B, took away from person B, the internal passport of a citizen, in order to repay the debt. The court ruled that person A was guilty of arbitrariness and did not cause significant harm by his actions^[4]. Summing up the consideration of the arbitrary seizure of a passport, we can conclude that it is actually punishable when taking possession of a passport not for the purpose of appealing in one's favor, but in connection with the alleged right to property under Article 330 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 19.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Other illegal methods such as: kidnapping, acquisition, illegal seizure of an identity card and taking a passport as collateral have not been considered in detail by us, as they are reflected in the legislation of the Russian Federation and, as it seems to us, do not need a detailed analysis in this article. However, I would like to note that it is interesting that such actions with a passport as handing over "bail", depositing to third parties are legal, but accepting a passport as collateral is illegal, although, in our opinion, it is necessary in the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation to also fix the punishment for handing over "bail" and for storage to third parties. It is also not punishable to report the loss of a passport to the police, although in our opinion, a person should assume that his document can be used by offenders for an illegal purpose, and therefore, the protection of the right to a name in this case is unnecessary. An exception is the case of loss of a passport, when a person, due to insurmountable life circumstances, unconsciousness, memory loss or for other legitimate reason, could not report the loss of a passport to the police. With all the above-described illegal methods of passport seizure, in our opinion, there is a certain probability of using the passport for a socially dangerous illegal purpose, in which the right to the name of the injured person will be violated. Therefore, their analysis is necessary. 2) Involved (interested). Documents are intentionally provided to a front person for their own benefit For example, person A provided a passport to person B in order for person B, instead of person A, to pass the unified state exam. In this method, the document is provided by the interested person at his own request, in order, by "forgery of a person", to circumvent the legal requirements provided for in a public or private institution. In this case, criminal legal protection of the right to the name of the person who provided the documents is unnecessary, due to the illegal independent provision of identity documents or personal data. In this regard, it is necessary to bring to justice both the person who committed the "forgery of a person" and the person who provided identity documents or personal data. 3) With temporary borrowing that is not theft. It seems to us that criminal liability for "temporary borrowing" of a passport is not provided for, this position is also held by other scientists^[5]. However, in order to examine in detail and find out whether this is the case, we again need to refer to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2002 No. 29 "On judicial practice in cases of theft, robbery, robbery" (with amendments and additions) where paragraph 7 clarifies: "Do not form the composition of theft and robbery are illegal actions aimed at seizing someone else's property not for selfish purposes, but for example, for the purpose of its temporary use and subsequent return to the owner . . . "^[6]. A selfish goal, as it seems to us, for example, when "forgery of a person" in order to evade punishment is not seen, since the person does not seek to obtain personal benefits or benefits of people with whom he is connected by certain relationships (friendly, property, kindred, etc.), accomplices of the act, but seeks to evade punishment. However, the resolution specifies exactly ". . . with subsequent return to the owner. . . . ". Is the passport property? We have not found a clear answer to this question in scientific sources. However, it seems to us that by referring to the signs of the object of theft, it is possible to try to get closer to the answer to the above question. So, the authors identify a different number of signs of the object of theft, [A. A. Bakradze, S. V. Maksimov, S. M. Kochoi, L. D. Gaukhman, E. V. Gerasimova] but basically, everyone agrees on the mandatory presence of economic signs of the object of theft. In our opinion, the economic signs of the object of theft - someone else's property - include two independent signs: 1) the property must have material value 2) human labor must be applied to it, isolating it from its natural state. It is very important to determine whether a passport is of material value, since it is inextricably linked to causing damage to the owner or the owner of the property. S. M. Kochoi, believes that a passport represents a certain material value^[7], others Skripchuk O. Yu. , Mukhtarova E. A. ^[8], Barsukova I. G. ^[9] believe that documents (passport, diploma of education, work record, identity card, etc.) do not have economic value. [It seems that the authors, when talking about economic value, meant, namely, material value]. As it seems to us, the passport, of course, has a certain material value, since it "consists" of a form of a "State Sign" with value [on the Internet you can find offers to sell an unfilled blank blank passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation worth 80 thousand rubles, of course the cost on the "black market"[10], you can not give as an example, however, we can assume that the cost of a passport, due to the use of three types of protective fibers in its manufacture, a three-tone watermark, a laminating film with holographic images, special paper is high^[11]] and a photo of a face, which also has a certain value. Also, human labor was applied to the creation of the passport, isolating it from its natural state. However, the presence of an economic attribute is guaranteed not to classify the passport as property, therefore, I think it is necessary to refer to the legislation of the Russian Federation. So, in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 08. 07. 1997 N 828 (ed. dated 18.11. 2016) "On approval of the Regulations on the passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation, a sample form and a description of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation" passport is the main document certifying the identity of a citizen of the Russian Federation on the territory of the Russian Federation. This resolution does not contain information about the identity of the passport. However, there are other types of passports: a general civil passport [hereinafter referred to as a passport], official, diplomatic, which, in our opinion, differ from an internal passport, basically, in that they certify the identity of a citizen only outside the Russian Federation. Therefore, having not found an answer in the legislation on the internal passport, it seems to us that it is necessary to consider the legislation concerning the diplomatic and service passport. In the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated 15. 08. 1996 N 114 FZ Moscow "On the procedure for leaving the Russian Federation and entering the Russian Federation"^[12], Article 12 states that diplomatic and service passports are the property of the Russian Federation [in our opinion, if an official and diplomatic passport are the property of the Russian Federation, then by analogy, a general civil passport (OPP) should also be such. After all, both official and diplomatic documents and the OSP are documents, the owners of which are subject to the immunity of the state abroad. However, the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation do not reflect whether the OPP is the property of the Russian Federation or not. On the first page of the OPP, there is an appeal to the person in whose name the passport is issued as the "owner", which, by analogy, is contained in both the diplomatic and service passport] and is subject to return to the sending organization. In the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 18, 2005 No. 687 "On approval of samples and descriptions of forms of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation, a diplomatic passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation and an official passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation certifying the identity of a citizen of the Russian Federation outside the territory of the Russian Federation^[13] containing in relation to a person whose metric data and photo are posted on an official, diplomatic The legislator refers to the passport as the "owner". However, the owner differs from the owner in that he has the right to own and use, but not dispose of, the property. Thus, judging by the norms of the law, the owner of the official and diplomatic passport is the state, and the owners are a person. However, the ownership of a person is limited by other norms of the law (Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, etc.), in civil law, with quasi-ownership, ownership is not absolute, i.e. ownership is limited by other rights. But this type of ownership refers to things. Is it possible to attribute a passport to things? Some scientists believe that a passport is not a thing, and its rightful owner does not have classical rights of ownership, disposition, possession. The document certifies legal acts on the basis of which the person specified in the document can obtain certain rights or be released from obligations. And a person cannot make any civil transactions with him: donations, exchanges, sales^[14]. However, it seems to us that by purchasing a civilian firearm, a person becomes its owner, but still making any civil transactions with it is also limited by the buyer's legal grounds for acquisition. Which, by no means, tells us that civilian weapons are not property, but only indicates that the right of ownership is limited by other norms of the law. In order to answer the above question, it seems to us that it is necessary to figure out what the internal passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation "consists of". So: 1) The form of the "State Sign", the signature of the person who issued the passport, the seal of the body that issued the passport, data on the issuance of the passport (date, code and name of the unit, its series and number), extract from the Regulations on the passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation 2) Personal data of the person, as well as about his place of residence, military duty, marital status, children, data on the blood group and Rh factor, signature of the person, photo of the person. Considering the "composition" of the passport, we concluded that the passport "consists" mainly of private data about a person: his photo, to which he has a property right, the image in the photo, to which the person has a non-property right, as well as his personal signature. Also, the passport "consists" of the handwritten signature of the person who issued the passport, the seal of the authority that issued the passport and the data on the issuance of the passport, which undoubtedly are signs of state activity, and the form of the "State Sign" is state property. The person who has paid the state fee [the type of fee of the Russian Federation, which is charged during the procedure for registration and issuance of documents] when issuing an internal passport, a citizen of the Russian Federation does not pay for the passport form, namely the procedure for registration and issuance of a passport. In this regard, these costs of a citizen who is obliged to obtain an internal passport cannot be attributed to the cost of a passport. Thus, it can be concluded that the internal passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation is a rather complex object of the material world, first of all, an identifier document of a citizen of the Russian Federation, but also a thing that is not the absolute possession of a citizen of the Russian Federation, and not the absolute property of the Russian Federation. Which in itself is not "within the scope" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation or the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As it seems to us, the passport and other identification documents must be recognized as exceptional things. Which is reflected in modern domestic legislation. This idea is confirmed by a case from the cassation practice in criminal cases of the Perm Regional Court for the first half of 2009: K. K. was found guilty of fraud and of stealing K. I. from his mother and N. passports who lived in their apartment. The court found that K. K. used his passports to obtain loans from one of the banks by fraud. After completing the transactions, the passports were re-entered into the possession of their owners. Thus, although these documents were used for selfish purposes, he took possession of them temporarily, without the intention to turn into his own property or the property of third parties, i.e. there was a temporary borrowing. K. K. had passports for only a short period and used them exclusively when concluding financial contracts. Since such actions cannot be considered as theft of documents, the judicial board terminated the criminal case regarding the conviction of K. K. for two crimes of Part 2 of Article 325 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the absence of corpus delicti in the act [Case No. 22 - 2559, Leninsky District Court of Perm[15]] Summing up, we state that the passport has material value, from the cassation decision of the Perm court it can also be concluded that the internal passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation is property. Based on the above, we conclude that the internal passport is included in a special group of property called documents, which is not the absolute possession of a person, and not the absolute property of the state. It should also be noted that an interesting fact is that after the expiration of the validity period, upon receipt of a new OZP, it is returned to the owner and the owner already becomes the owner of the OZP, which he can dispose of. Summing up, it seems to us that the temporary borrowing of a passport, an act that really exists and is not punishable under the legislation of the Russian Federation, is a way of gratuitously withdrawing and (or) converting someone else's document in favor of the perpetrator or other persons with a socially dangerous illegal purpose. Further, in order to classify, differentiate and analyze in more detail the "forgery of a person", it is necessary to divide it by goals: 1) "Forgery of a person" in order to pass tests (entrance to an educational institution, or exams (tests) while studying at an educational institution, in order to obtain a driver's license, a certificate for the right to operate a small vessel, etc.) So, in 2009, in the Rostov region, employees of the OBEP revealed that for some Completely different people took the exam for schoolchildren. Three of the exam takers turned out to be math teachers, and a brother came to take the exam for one student^[16]. There was no punishment for the citizens who carried out the "forgery of persons". According to available information from the Internet, there are firms providing illegal services consisting in "forgery of a person" when passing exams for admission to prestigious universities in the country^[17]. Taking advantage of a gap in the legislation of the Russian Federation, offenders, without fear of responsibility, damage the state and "destroy" the fate of people who did not enroll in universities on a budgetary basis. A large number of talented young people and their relatives do not have the means to enter universities on a paid basis, and offenders deprive decent people of the right to free education, which undermines the authority of the domestic educational system. 2) "Forgery of a person" for the purpose of passing or not passing a medical commission (upon admission to an educational institution of the army. law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation, when passing a medical commission to obtain a driver's license, for the right to operate a small vessel, etc., with the intention of evading service in the Russian army). In 2016, in the city of Bobruisk, Republic of Belarus, traffic inspectors stopped a car driven by a 37-year-old local resident without a hand. Traffic police officers asked for a medical certificate and revealed that the fact of the absence of a brush was not reflected in the certificate. After that, the citizen told that his twin brother had passed a medical examination for him. For using other people's documents, the violator was sentenced to a fine and a year of probation under Article 380 of the Criminal Code of Belarus. Forgery, manufacture, use or sale of forged documents, stamps, seals, letterheads^[18]. Interestingly, the commentary to this article^[19] clearly states that the use of a deliberately forged document is also recognized as the deliberate presentation of an original document issued to another person (someone else's driver's license, disability certificate, student ID, student certificate, etc.). The above court decision confirms the use of this provision by the courts. However, it seems to us that it is unacceptable to agree that the original documents were found to be forged in court, since the original document has no corrections or improvements. In Belarus, the legislator, having leveled the original and forged document, of course, eliminated the legal gap regarding the "forgery of a person", however, from a legal point of view, this decision is controversial. 2. 1) "Forgery of a person" in order to obtain a sick leave. We have not found any examples of this offense, however, it can be assumed that due to the lack of criminalization of this act, the cases of the above forgery did not have a wide resonance in the media. We can independently assume that person A may ask person B who has a disease (cold, flu, etc.) according to documents A, to come to an appointment at the clinic and receive a sick leave according to other people's documents. There is no punishment for this act in the criminal law or administrative legislation. 3) "Forgery of a person" for the purpose of military service in the ranks of the Russian army. So, in 2005, a 22-year-old resident of Saransk went to serve in the army for the second time, but using the personal data of a friend who was a dodger. He took the oath, and continued to re-serve in military service. But after that, he wrote a letter to the address of a deviant friend, in which he told the details of his actions. This letter was read by his parents instead of his friend. Considering this act illegal, the parents went to the territorial bodies of internal affairs, where they presented the letter. It was not possible to serve a resident of Saransk for the second time^[20]. They could not bring to justice for this act, due to the lack of a norm. The public danger of this act lies in the fact that a non-serving person, if this fact is not discovered, evades service, thereby violating the established procedure for recruiting the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Interestingly, in the XIX century in Russia, it was allowed by contract to serve for another person In 1699-1874 . The Russian army was recruited on the basis of conscription, to which all representatives of the taxable estates were subject, but there were exceptions. The right to exemption from military service was granted to persons with a certain level of education, state awards or engaged in activities necessary for the State. They also received this right for medical or family reasons. The main opportunity to avoid recruitment for the majority of the taxable population of the country was the replacement of "natural" recruits with "hunters" hired as recruits^[21]. However, the laws of the "last century" are currently unacceptable, and the military service of one person for another, it seems, should be punishable in accordance with the laws of the Russian Federation. 4) "Forgery of a person" in order to serve a sentence for another person. In 2009, a man was convicted in Nizhny Novgorod who presented himself with the personal data of his older brother. And only when in 2013 the older brother was arrested for another new crime, it turned out that the younger one was not serving his sentence deservedly^[22]. 5) "Forgery of a person" in order to participate in voting in elections. On September 10, 2017, deputies of the Duma were elected in Petropavlovsk -Kamchatsky, a serviceman who took part in voting at one of the city's polling stations tried to vote twice - once using his passport, and the second time using someone else's^[23]. Currently, the punishment for this violation is not provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation or the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. 6) "Forgery of a person" for the purpose of employment in public or private organizations. So, in 2014, the prosecutor's office of the Gagarin district of Sevastopol, during an inspection conducted at the Sevastopol Professional Trade and Culinary Lyceum, established the fact of employment of an employee using someone else's documents^[24]. The person was not responsible for employment based on other people's documents. Also, an interesting case of the above-considered "forgery of a person" was shared by Nikolai Ivanovich Ilyinsky, Doctor of Historical Sciences, retired police colonel, information about the actual incident, as he himself told in an interview with a socio-political publication, he discovered while working in the archives while preparing a PhD thesis on the history of the Internal Affairs of the Belarusian SSR in 1941-1950. The plot of this story is that the traitor, an assistant of the SS, managed to escape, he killed a Soviet soldier, took possession of his documents, and got a job in the police under a false name^[25]. Turning to this case, it can be assumed that such "forgeries" occurred, but had no resonance, due to the fact that an official report about what happened could damage the reputation and diminish the authority of the law enforcement system as a whole. 7) "Forgery of a person" in order to cross the state border of the Russian Federation. In 2011, while at the Khabarovsk checkpoint, person A made an attempt to illegally cross the State border of the Russian Federation, as follows: due to the fact that person A was a bailiff, person A was temporarily restricted from leaving the Russian Federation. Knowing about this and having at his disposal a foreign passport in the name of his brother-in-law, person A decided to use it to illegally cross the State border of the Russian Federation. However, the person was identified at the passport control line by the checkpoint controller upon presentation of an invalid document for him. The court sentenced to find person A guilty of committing a crime under Part 3 of Article 30, Part 1 of Article 322 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation^[26]. Unlike previous methods, with this method of "forgery of a person", a person is liable, according to Article 322 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which is provided for illegal crossing of the state border of the Russian Federation without valid documents for the right to enter or leave the Russian Federation. However, responsibility comes precisely for illegal crossing of the border of the Russian Federation, and responsibility is not provided for "forgery of a person". To solve this problem at the legislative level, it seems to us that it is necessary to introduce an optional feature to Article 322 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, i.e. illegal crossing of the border of the Russian Federation: a) using someone else's documents. 8) "Forgery of a person" for the purpose of converting property or the right to property, in their favor or third parties. So in Russia, for 9 months of 2017, Roskomnadzor received 6.5 thousand complaints in connection with the use of someone else's passport data for illegal registration of microloans. The agency noted that the lost documents, photocopies of passports are used to make loans, and subsequently the money is not returned by the offenders^[27]. In this case, the encroachment is carried out on two protected objects - public relations developing in the field of distribution and redistribution, material goods, as well as public relations developing regarding the exercise of the right to a name, therefore, as it seems to us, by Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is also necessary to introduce an optional feature a) using other people's documents or personal data. 9) "Forgery of a person's valor" in order to obtain employment privileges. In 2009, an impostor got a job as an officer educator in the cadet corps named after Andrew the First-Called in Kaliningrad. At the registry office, he changed his first and last name to the first and last name of the hero of the war in Chechnya. Posing as a war hero, he provided the personnel department with forged copies of documents. He did not provide the originals, referring to their temporary absence. The "Hero" was taken at his word. Liability for forgery of a copy of documents is not provided, and therefore the person was not held accountable^[28]. 10) "Forgery of a person" in order to evade punishment. In 2013, an impostor who committed a criminal act was detained in the Voronezh region. This criminal was detained, investigative actions were carried out, taken to court, after which the trial began. The impostor pleaded guilty and asked for a hearing in a special order. In court, he again presented himself with the personal data of another person. He was sentenced to a term of 2 years under Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with serving in a settlement colony, where he was supposed to appear on his own, but realizing that he had not been exposed, naturally, he did not arrive at his destination. The person has not been identified to date ^[29]. We have considered this "forgery of a person" in more detail earlier^[30]. 11) Information and digital "forgery of a person". Forgery using e-mail or a page on a social network. In Russia, we have not found any precedents for the socially dangerous illegal use of someone else's e-mail address, but in Spain, a graduate student at the University of Barcelona was convicted of this act^[31]. In 2015, in Belokurikha, Altai Territory, a woman created a profile on a social Internet network, exposing someone else's photo of intimate content, indicating someone else's personal data. She corresponded on behalf of someone else and reported that she provided sex services. The woman was found guilty of committing a crime under Article 137, Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but she was not punished for the electronic digital "forgery of a person". In this case, the encroachment is carried out on two protected objects - public relations developing regarding the implementation of the constitutional principle of inviolability of private life, personal and family secrets, as well as public relations developing regarding the exercise of the right to a name, therefore, as it seems to us to Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is also necessary to introduce an optional feature: a) using someone else's documents or personal data. 12) "Forgery of a person" by a minor in order to enter a nightclub, purchase cigarettes and alcohol. So, in Estonia, presenting a passport or ID card of an older friend or acquaintance in order to get into a club or buy cigarettes, a teenager commits a crime. Also, using someone else's document and transferring one's own document for use by another can become an obstacle to working in a public institution and complicate entry into countries requiring a visa. In Estonia, various companies are conducting activities aimed at clarifying the illegality of these actions and preventing these crimes among minors . One of such companies was "Be yourself!", the face of this company, as a rule, is a well-known person in the country of the same age as young men and girls - potential offenders^[32]. In Article 185 of the Criminal Code of Estonia "Theft, destruction, damage or concealment of documents, seals and stamps", Part 2 states that the theft of an identity document or other official personal document, as well as the use of someone else's official personal document, is punishable by a fine, or arrest, or imprisonment for up to one year^[33]. Russian legislation does not provide for punishment for this act. 13) "Forgery of a minor" for the purpose of making a preferential or free trip by train, in transport, flying on an aircraft, or for the purpose of free admission to a circus, museum, concert or other events. For example, due to the fact that a child under 2 years old can fly with an adult on an airplane for free, person A, for an illegal purpose, takes the right to a free flight, his child, who is already more than 2 years old, takes from person B, the birth certificate of a child who is less than 2 years old, and by passing one child off as another, he acquires the illegal right to a free ticket. Using someone else's birth certificate of a child under the present legislation of the Russian Federation is not a punishable act, which is what unscrupulous parents use when carrying out such actions. 14) The general "forgery of a person". As a rule, this forgery is committed by people who are hiding from justice. Wanted for committing a crime. So, in the city of Aksai, Rostov region, the trial of person A, who shot himself with a hunting rifle in 1962, person B. For 54 years, the killer was hiding under a false name. After the crime was committed, the killer moved to the Ulyanovsk region and illegally acquired someone else's passport, a person similar to himself. Under someone else's personal data, he served in the army, got married, and had two sons. In 1998, under a false name, Person A was sentenced to 13 years for committing a new murder. After being released early in 2007, person A was convicted again and, while in prison, confessed to committing, 54 years ago, "forgery of a person" and murder to employees of a correctional colony^[34]. This type of "forgery of a person" is common, since during this "forgery" a person commits illegal actions every day, until the moment of exposure or self-exposure in a very long period of time. This is not the only case in Russia, we have found others^[35]. 15) "Forgery of a person" in order to escape from places of detention. So, in 2017, a prisoner, person A, of a strict regime penal colony in the Tambov region, during a long date, exchanged clothes with a friend, person B, who agreed to serve his sentence instead of the fugitive for a monetary reward of 3 million rubles. At the checkpoint, person B presented the passport of the brother of person A, who had previously been made up to match his appearance. The "face forgery" was not recognized at the checkpoint. After person A and B exchanged clothes, a wig, and glasses, person A decided to simulate a diabetic crisis, which he also succeeded - an ambulance had already arrived for the pseudo-ill, ready to take the patient to the hospital. However, in time, an employee of IK-4 noticed a difference in the appearance of person B from person A. And he called an employee to the service who could accurately recognize A's face by appearance. The employee who appeared guessed that in addition to the difference in appearance, it was necessary to check for tattoos that exactly belonged to person A, in order to unambiguously establish the fact of "forgery". When there were no tattoos, it became definitively clear that this was an attempt to "fake a face"^[36]. Also, "forgery of a person" can be differentiated on the basis of belonging to a person into "forgery of a person's voice", and these types of forgery also have their own subspecies, which can be divided by purpose. So, the "forgery of a person's voice" in order to obtain "confidential" information that cannot be obtained in an interview. An example of a prank show by Lexus and Vovan, who, taking advantage of a gap in legislation, introduced themselves to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his secretary Dmitry Peskov when talking with Elton John^[37]. You can also recall the Grammy-winning German band Milli Vanilli, which, as it later turned out, used vocal parts in the tracks that did not belong to the band members at all^[38]. "Forgery of the appearance of a person" so the offender, in order to withdraw 3 million rubles from someone else's account using someone else's passport, made make-up with the help of the staff of the Mosfilm film studio^[39], and in 2014, the criminals disguised themselves as a Krasnoyarsk man they killed in order to deceive a notary and inherit someone else's documents^[40], and some are even willing to undergo plastic surgery to avoid criminal prosecution^[41]. The number of types of "face forgery" seems to us to be much more than we have presented. In our opinion, the above types need to be analyzed in more detail from the point of view of violation of the inalienable rights of citizens, and in particular the right to a name. To identify the objects of the illegal act in each of the cases under consideration. For a detailed consideration of each type, it seems necessary to conduct an analysis of the need or excess of a more comprehensive criminal legal protection in individual studies. Due to the large number of types, we have listed in this article only the most, in our opinion, socially dangerous types of "forgery of a person". To summarize, let's say that a huge number of non-criminalized types of "forgery of a person" clearly indicates the need for criminal legal protection of the right to a name, in our opinion, a single norm concerning "forgery of a person" would eliminate the gap we are considering in the criminal law legislation of the Russian Federation. It seems to us that it is necessary to expand the disposition of Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by fixing the possibility of criminal prosecution for using someone else's document or personal data for a socially dangerous illegal purpose. So, part 3 of Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be worded as follows: "The use of a deliberately forged document, as well as the use of someone else's original document or personal data."