Comparative Analysis of the Telephone Fraud Liability in the Criminal Law of Russia and Foreign Countries Based on the Dynamics of Damage Example

Introduction. The telephone fraud is a serious problem faced both in Russia and abroad. With the development of digital technologies and Internet, the fraudsters find the new ways to deceive citizens by calling them on the phone, pretending to be the representatives of banks, law enforcement agencies or other official institutions. The dynamics of damage caused by such crimes is constantly growing, therefore, the efficient measures should be taken to prevent and suppress fraud. The aim of the article is to conduct a comparative analysis of the criminal law with respect to telephone fraud liability in Russia and foreign countries based on the dynamics of damage example.

Materials and Methods. The methodological basis of the research included the general and specific scientific methods of cognition. Among the general scientific methods, the dialectical and legalistic methods were used. In addition, the method of historical analysis, data analysis and synthesis methods were applied, the legal acts regulating the public relations on countering the telephone fraud were investigated. Also, a comparative legal method was used to analyse and compare different legal provisions. For more complete understanding of the problem, the analysis of the judicial practices of the Russian courts was carried out, which made it possible to evaluate the existing law enforcement practices in the specific situations.

Results. The analysis of the criminal law on fraud liability in Russia and foreign countries, as well as measures enforced to counteract fraud in the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China and the United States of America, has been carried out. The consequences of fraud as a type of crime have been studied, and the general dynamics of damage from the registered and investigated telephone frauds in the Russian Federation has been analysed. The main trends and features of such cases have been revealed.

Discussion and Conclusion. The analysis of the criminal law demonstrates that fraud liability in Russia and foreign countries has its own features. Studying these differences will help to identify the best practices in countering fraud and to develop the more efficient measures for preventing this type of crime and punishing the fraudsters.

1. Fomenko AI. To the Question of Concept “Crimes in the Sphere of High Technologies” Definition. Vestnik SeveroKavkazskogo gumanitarnogo institutа (Bulletin of the North Caucasian Humanitarian Institute). 2013;(1(5)):43–50. (In Russ.)

2. Anapolskaya AI. Activities of Criminal Organizations Laundering Money Using Electronic Payment Transactions. In: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Public Security as a Criminal-Legal and Criminological Category”. Tambov; 2015. P. 52–56. (In Russ.)

3. Anapolskaya AI. Order of Interaction between Law Enforcement Agencies in the Investigation of Bank Frauds Committed in the Functioning of Electronic Payments. Vestnik Tambovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki (Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities). 2015;(5 (145)):221–224. (In Russ.)

4. Astishina TV, Markelova EV. Problems of Investigation of Crimes Related to Fraudulent Actions Committed Using Mobile Telephone Communications. Bulletin of the Kazan Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2014;(2(16)):94–98. (In Russ.)

5. Begishev IR. Some Issues of Counteracting Fraud in the Field of Computer Information. Bulletin of the Kazan Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2016;(3(25)):112–117. (In Russ.)

6. Potapenko NS. On the Problems of Criminal Liability for Crimes Involving the Use of Bank Cards. Criminal Law. 2007;(4):55–58. (In Russ.)

7. Yani PS. Fraud and Other Crimes against Property: Criminal Liability. Monograph. Moscow; 2002. 136 p. (In Russ.)

8. Nagorny AA. Some Problems of Understanding Computer Information in the Context of Modern Threats to Information Security. Legal Science. 2013;(4):142–145. (In Russ.)

9. Peizak AV. Countering Cybercrime in the USA. Society, Law, Statehood: Retrospective and Perspective. 2022;(4(12)):54–59. (In Russ.)

10. Bogolyubova TA. Crime Prevention: A Modern View on the Problem. Bulletin of the University of the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation. 2014;(4(42)):112–116. (In Russ.)

11. Volevodz AG. Convention on Cybercrime: Innovations in Legal Regulation. Pravovye voprosy svyazi (Legal Issues of Telecommunications). 2007;(2):17–25. (In Russ.)

12. Mitskevich AF, Susloparov AV. The Conception of Computer-Stored Information According to Russian and Foreign Criminal Law. Gaps in Russian Legislation. 2010;(2):206–209. (In Russ.)