Introduction. The subject of the study, the results of which are presented in the article, was damage as an element of the objective side of the crime, liability for which is provided for by Art. 180 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (illegal use of means of individualization of goods (works, services)). The purpose of the study was to determine the essence of damage as an element of the objective side of the crime and to distinguish it from related elements that determine the objective side of the criminal act. Methods. The methodological basis of the study included general scientific and special methods of cognition. The comparative legal method made it possible to analyze the legal provisions related to the definition of damage as a sign of the objective side of the crime. In preparing the article, court decisions related to the topic of the study were studied. Results.The practice of judicial consideration of criminal cases under Art. 180 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation shows that damage is most often defined as lost profit. In this regard, the courts, finding themselves in a situation where there are no specific instructions from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the methods of calculating lost profits, apply a method that equates the concepts of «major damage» and «large size», which seems unacceptable. The results of the study can be used for further theoretical understanding of the problem analyzed in the article, as well as for practical testing in the context of investigating crimes classified under Art. 180 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Criminal liability, elements of a crime, means of individualization of goods, illegal use of a trademark, major damage, large size.
1. YesakovG.A. Oponimaniikrupnogoushcherba, razmeraineodnokratnostivsostavakhprestupleniyprotivintellektual'noysobstvennosti // ImushchestvennyyeotnosheniyavRossiyskoyFederatsii. 2019. № 5. S. 88-89.
2. ParkhomenkoS.D. Ugolovnayaotvetstvennost' zanezakonnoyeispol'zovaniyetovarnykhznakov: tolkovaniyepriznakov «neodnokratnost'» i «krupnyyushcherb» // Ugolovnoyepravo. 2023. № 11. S. 10-24.
3. MartykhinaM.V. Nekotoryyeproblemypravoprimenitel'noypraktikivsferezashchitypravnatovarnyyeznaki // Obrazovaniyeipravo. 2023. № 4. S. 258-263.
4. YaniP.S. Rol' VerkhovnogoSudaRFvresheniiproblemkvalifikatsiiprestupleniyvsfereekonomicheskoydeyatel'nosti // Zakon. 2008. № 11. S. 39-50.
5. KudinovM.A. Teoreticheskiyeaspektystrukturyisoderzhaniyaponyatiya «intellektual'nyyeprava» // Novyyyuridicheskiyvestnik. 2022. № 3. S. 13-19.
6. PetrykinaN.I. Omerakhyuridicheskoyotvetstvennostizanezakonnoyeispol'zovaniyesredstvindividualizatsiitovarov (rabot, uslug) naterritoriiYEAES // MezhdunarodnoyesotrudnichestvoYevraziyskikhgosudarstv: politika, ekonomika, pravo. 2018. № 9. S. 90-97.
7. PinkevichT.V. Prestupleniyavsfereekonomicheskoydeyatel'nosti: ugolovno-pravovayakharakteristika, sistema, osobennostikvalifikatsii. Stavropol': Stavropol'servisshkola, 2000. 207 s.
8. YermakovS.V. Voprosyyuridicheskoyotvetstvennostizanezakonnoyeispol'zovaniyesredstvindividualizatsiitovarov, rabot, uslug // Pravovoyeregulirovaniyeekonomicheskoydeyatel'nosti. 2024. № 1. S. 14-21.
9. ShageyevaR.M. Vozniknoveniyeirazvitiyeinstitutapreyuditsiivugolovno-protsessual'nomzakonodatel'stveRossii // Juvenisscientia. 2018. № 9. S. 46-49.
10. RamazanovaU.Sh. Zashchitapravnatovarnyyznak // Vestniknauki. 2022. № 7. S. 101-104.
11. NovikovaYe.V. Aktual'nyyevoprosyzashchityisklyuchitel'nykhpravnatovarnyyeznaki // Stolypinskiyvestnik. 2022. № 8. S. 4409-4416.
12. PankevichL.L. Nekotoryyeproblemypraktikirassmotreniyadel, svyazannykhsnezakonnymispol'zovaniyemtovarnogoznaka // ImushchestvennyyeotnosheniyavRossiyskoyFederatsii. 2012. № 2. S. 103-111.
13. BerdnikovA.Ye. Podkhodykopredeleniyurazmeraushcherbaprinezakonnomispol'zovaniisredstvindividualizatsiitovarov, rabot, uslug (st. 180 UKRF) // Gosudarstvennayanauchno-tekhnicheskayapolitikavsferekriminalisticheskogoobespecheniyapravookhranitel'noydeyatel'nosti: sborniknauchnykhstateypomaterialammezhdunarodnoynauchno-prakticheskoykonferentsii. M., 2023.S. 227-231.
14. MashavetsP.A. Kvoprosuokharakteristikeprestupleniya, predusmotrennogost. 180 UKRF // Kriminologicheskiyzhurnal. 2023. № 1. S. 83-98.
15. AristovaYa.A. Osobennostipravovoyotvetstvennostizaprestupleniya, svyazannyyesnezakonnymispol'zovaniyemtovarnykhznakov // Sledstvennayadeyatel'nost': materialyVserossiyskoynauchno-prakticheskoykonferentsii. 2021. № 1. S. 134-138.
