The prison in Simferopol waited for its builder

As it became known to Kommersant, Oleg Korshunov, former deputy director of the Federal Penitentiary Service for Finance, who was found guilty of embezzlement during the construction of a pre-trial detention center in Simferopol, received 16 years in prison, a year more than the prosecutor’s office requested. They did not take Oleg Korshunov into custody, since he is serving a 12-year sentence under two previous sentences. Despite the impressive punishment, the convicted person can soon apply for parole, and in addition, he, together with the defense, seeks release from punishment due to a serious illness.

The judge of the Central District Court of Simferopol, Alexander Voronoi, announced only the introductory and operative parts of his decision. From them it followed that the former deputy director of the Federal Penitentiary Service for financial and logistics issues Oleg Korshunov, the ex-head of SU-23 Valery Kaklyugin and businessman Andrey Uglanov were found guilty of fraud on an especially large scale (part 4 of article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

For Oleg Korshunov, given his two previous convictions (12 years for embezzlement in the purchase of sugar and fuel, as well as in the production of shoes for the needs of the Federal Penitentiary Service), the state prosecutor requested 15 years of general regime. The other defendants, Kaklyugin and Uglanov, considered that seven and eight years in the camps, respectively, would be enough.

The judge – and all three defendants were present in the hall – on his own behalf added a year of imprisonment to Oleg Korshunov, appointed Valery Kaklyugin seven years, ordering him to be taken into custody in the courtroom, and Andrei Uglanov, who cooperated with the investigation, gave three years and six months, releasing him from punishment in connection with serving the term under investigation and trial. In addition, the court satisfied the claim of the Federal Penitentiary Service against the convicts, collecting from them jointly and severally 94 million rubles. It should be noted that earlier the damage, according to the verdict, was repaid by the General Director of Unistroy, Maya Gagua, who admitted her guilt and was sentenced in a special order to four years and six months probation.

According to investigators, in 2015 the then deputy director of the Federal Penitentiary Service Oleg Korshunov, Valery Kaklyugin and Andrey Uglanov agreed to embezzle budget funds allocated for the construction of a pre-trial detention center for 366 places.

The departmental SU-23 was supposed to be built in Simferopol by 2016 within the framework of the federal target program “Development of the Russian Penitentiary System”. However, Oleg Korshunov, according to the TFR, has achieved the inclusion of the Unistroy company among the co-executors of the project. She did not build a prison, but, according to investigators, she stole about 94 million rubles.

Oleg Korshunov’s lawyer, Sergei Starovoitov, told Kommersant that the verdict would be appealed as soon as the defense received a court decision. The defender believes that in this case there was no actual event of the crime. As evidence, he cites the decision of the arbitration court, according to which the work on the pre-trial detention center was fully completed, but not fully paid for by the Federal Penitentiary Service, the rest was recovered from the department.

In addition, lawyer Starovoitov noted that the Federal State Unitary Enterprise of the Federal Penitentiary Service, which was recognized as a victim, did not make any demands on the defendants, and they appeared already at the prison department itself.

Mr. Starovoitov said that his client Korshunov, given the time spent in the pre-trial detention center, could soon apply for parole. However, it may not come to this, since Oleg Korshunov was diagnosed with a serious illness, in which it is impossible to keep defendants in criminal cases in a pre-trial detention center and a colony. Previously, the courts that considered the defense’s statements on this issue, under various pretexts, denied her. The Supreme Court should soon put an end to this dispute.