Search

A Bribe to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Fiscal Service Case of lawyers Kostyra and Pynzar

  • Date of commencement of the case: 07/06/2023
  • Instance: HACC
  • Stage of criminal proceedings: Judicial proceedings
Track case progress If you would like to follow the case, leave your email and get updates sent straight to your inbox
A Bribe to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Fiscal Service Case of lawyers Kostyra and Pynzar A Bribe to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Fiscal Service Case of lawyers Kostyra and Pynzar

Case description

The HACC found lawyers Andrii Kostyra and Anton Pynzar guilty of soliciting a $300 bribe to officials of the Prosecutor General's Office and the Fiscal Service.

According to investigators, during the investigation of the sale of counterfeit medicines, the SFS seized a large portion of property from the businessman, including expensive cars. Later, lawyers Kostyra and Pynzar conspired to give a bribe to influence officials of the SFS and the Prosecutor General's Office.

The defendants held numerous meetings and phone calls, promising that once they received the full amount, the seized property would be returned, and the case would be closed. The businessman refused to pay the bribe, and ultimately, the criminal scheme failed.

The lawyers were charged under Article 369-2, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. They pleaded guilty, and as a result, the HACC ordered each of them to pay UAH 93.500 based on the plea agreement.

Pynzar posted UAH 2 million in bail, which was transferred to UNITED24 under the Education and Science section. In addition, the lawyer is required to pay UAH 2.1 million for the restoration of schools and the arrangement of bomb shelters and generators.

Kostyra's bail was also transferred to UNITED24, and the convict must additionally pay UAH 800,000 for educational needs and UAH 2.5 million to the Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundation to purchase vehicles for the military.

  • Proceeding No.: 52022000000000298
  • Case No.: 991/4881/23 show all cases hide other cases
  • Other court cases No.: 991/5952/22, 991/6419/22, 991/518/23, 991/516/23, 991/521/23, 991/515/23, 991/517/23, 991/897/23, 991/895/23, 991/903/23, 991/896/23, 991/1354/23, 991/1351/23, 991/1353/23, 991/1913/23, 991/1827/23, 991/2232/23, 991/2426/23, 991/2424/23, 991/2427/23, 991/2425/23, 991/2397/23, 991/3108/23, 991/4423/23, 991/4424/23, 991/4420/23, 991/4418/23
  • Incriminated: Article 368, part 4, Article 369, part 4, Article 369-2, part 2, Article 190, part 4
Instance Key parties Instance /Key parties:
HACC
07/06/2023

Panel of judges: Shyroka K.Yu.

Infographics

The Case of lawyers Kostyra and Pynzar

Lawyers Andrii Kostyra and Anton Pynzar solicited a $300 bribe to the SFS and Prosecutor General's Office to ensure the return of the seized property.

Article 369-2, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine

  • pic
    August 2021-September 2022
    Pynzar and Kostyra solicited the businessman to pay a bribe
  • pic
    January 31, 2023
    The NABU notified defendants of suspicion
  • February 2, 2023
    The HACC imposed a UAH 2 million bail on each of Kostyra and Pynzar
  • pic
    June 6, 2023
    The HACC received an indictment
  • December 9, 2024
    The prosecutor and the defendants concluded plea agreements
  • pic
    December 12, 2024
    The HACC found Kostyra and Pynzar guilty and approved their plea agreements. Lawyers were ordered to pay fines

Decisions from the Register

Case No. Court Decision date Decision type
991/5952/22 HACC 29/11/2022
991/5952/22 HACC 29/11/2022
991/6419/22 HACC 16/12/2022
991/6419/22 HACC 16/12/2022
991/518/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/516/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/521/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/515/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/517/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/516/23 HACC 24/01/2023
991/897/23 HACC 07/02/2023
991/897/23 HACC 07/02/2023
991/895/23 HACC 08/02/2023
991/895/23 HACC 08/02/2023
991/903/23 HACC 14/02/2023
991/903/23 HACC 14/02/2023
991/896/23 HACC AC 15/02/2023
991/1354/23 HACC 17/02/2023
991/1351/23 HACC 17/02/2023
991/1353/23 HACC 17/02/2023
991/896/23 HACC AC 20/02/2023
991/896/23 HACC AC 20/02/2023
991/896/23 HACC 20/02/2023 On the imposition of an interim measure in the form of detention
991/896/23 HACC 20/02/2023 On the imposition of an interim measure in the form of detention
991/1913/23 HACC 08/03/2023
991/1913/23 HACC 08/03/2023
991/1827/23 HACC 09/03/2023
991/2232/23 HACC 17/03/2023
991/2232/23 HACC 17/03/2023
991/2426/23 HACC 29/03/2023
991/2424/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2427/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2425/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2425/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2426/23 HACC 29/03/2023
991/2424/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2427/23 HACC 29/03/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/2397/23 HACC 06/04/2023
991/2397/23 HACC 06/04/2023
991/3108/23 HACC 18/04/2023
991/3108/23 HACC 18/04/2023
991/3108/23 HACC AC 24/04/2023 On the return of the appeal
991/4423/23 HACC 01/06/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/4424/23 HACC 01/06/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/4424/23 HACC 01/06/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/4423/23 HACC 01/06/2023 Decision on temporary access
991/4881/23 HACC 07/06/2023 On the appointment of a preparatory court hearing
991/4420/23 HACC 07/06/2023
991/4418/23 HACC 07/06/2023
991/4881/23 HACC 12/06/2023 On the appointment of a trial
991/4881/23 HACC 12/06/2023 On the appointment of a trial
991/4881/23 HACC 12/12/2024 Verdict on the basis of an agreement