A misappropriation or squandering case — a practical defence view
Misappropriation or squandering, provided for by Article 182 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, is a case that usually begins inside an enterprise — with an inventory, a report or an internal audit — and the involvement of a lawyer at precisely that stage determines the further direction of the case. The law defines this offence as the unlawful misappropriation or squandering of another person's thing or property right, where that thing or right was in the lawful possession or administration of the accused.
The punishment is arranged in three tiers. An act provided for by the first part is punishable by a fine, or by house arrest for a term of six months to two years, or by imprisonment for a term of three to five years. The second part — an act committed by a group with prior agreement, more than once, with significant damage, or through the use of an official position — is punishable by a fine or imprisonment for four to seven years, with deprivation of the right to hold office or to carry out an activity for up to three years. The third part — an organized group, a large amount, or a person convicted two or more times — is punishable by imprisonment for seven to eleven years with the same deprivation.
Where the defence begins — the element of lawful possession
The first question a lawyer verifies is the existence of lawful possession or administration: whether the property was entrusted to the person on a lawful basis — by contract, by assignment, by occupational authority. This element is a necessary element of the article, and its absence changes the classification.
The assessment of damage — significant damage and a large amount
The second part employs the element of significant damage, and the third the element of a large amount. The quantitative assessment of the damage rests on accounting and inventory expertise, and the lawyer's detailed review of those conclusions often changes the part under which the case proceeds.
Prior agreement and commission by a group
One element of the second part is commission by a group with prior agreement, and of the third part an organized group. The difference between these concepts is essential for the punishment, and establishing them requires a precise analysis of the evidence — who agreed, when and in what form.
The influence of previous convictions
The third part covers a person who has been convicted two or more times for unlawful appropriation of another's property or for extortion. A lawyer verifies the legality of those judgments, their formal correctness and their role in the current classification.
Our approach
We work both on the defence side and for victims: we analyse the financial documents, verify the expert examinations and form a position on the type and measure of the punishment. The rules of procedure and the time limits are established by other acts of procedural legislation. Contact us — at the first consultation we will assess the prospects of the case.
In the period before detention, the lawyer's role is particularly visible: the person's first explanations, the documentation he or she submits, and his or her position in relation to the results of the internal audit determine how the basis of the charge is built. We work to ensure that every circumstance concerning the person is recorded and presented in a timely and complete manner.
Experience in our practice shows that in cases of this category the outcome often depends on how precisely the chronology of the movement of the property is reconstructed: when, on what basis and from whom the property was transferred, how it was recorded, and at what moment the deficiency appeared. This chronological analysis becomes the common field of the defence and the prosecution, and its careful preparation determines the strength of the position in court.
Our approach covers the parallel work of every direction of the case: the analysis of the documentary material, the review of the expert conclusions and the formation of the legal position proceed simultaneously, so that no detail is lost. Experience shows that precisely early and systematic involvement creates the best outcome in cases of this category. For a consultation, the existing materials of the case or a part of them are needed — at the very first meeting the lawyer will assess the prospects and define the next steps.