STÁTNÍ TAJEMNÍK U ŘÍŠSKÉHO PROTEKTORA V ČECHÁCH A NA MORAVĚ, PRAHA, inv. 1643, sig. 109-4/1398 Page 41 · 41 of 49
STATE SECRETARY FOR THE RUSSIAN PROTECTOR IN THINGS AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 1643, sig. 109-4/1398
English Translation
10 - 28 - Contrary to the adoption of the defence, the acceptance of the continuation of the relationship is not excluded either because of the existence of a limitation period for the prosecution of the infringements in accordance with § 9 of the authorization regulation of l8.9.1939.The limitation period of six months originally provided for in this regulation is extended to three years by § 6 of the regulation on administrative criminal law and administrative criminal proceedings in food, supply and pricing matters of 23.10.1941 (No. 393 Collection of laws and regulations). According to this, the defendant Zavazal was to be punished for aid from § 1 (1) Kwvo, § 49 StGB and the defendants Biskup,Jindra,Mêstecky, Dobfensky,Branny,Vodiêka,Macoun,Krejêa and Exnar for continuing crimes against § 1 Abs.l Kivo, by the participation of these accused persons in the sale of, according to their knowledge, black, i.e. without paying slaughter tax, without registration for slaughter tax and without making an inspection of animals or meat, they have at the same time trained themselves in tax fraud within the meaning of § 403 RA0, whereas, with regard to the defendant Exnar, it was not established that the meat bought by him in the summer of 1994 was derived from black slaughters. found crimes according to S 1 sec.l Kwvo entity within the meaning of § &3 StGB. Contrary to the assumption of the indictment authority, the defendants had to deny the application of § 4 of the People's Penalty Ordinance: although violations of war-related rules could also comply with the provisions of §4 of the Code, the circumstances of which were particularly justified in the state of the crime, which, in itself, did not take into account the facts of the war crimes and which somehow facilitated or favoured the concrete nature of the execution of the patent The circumstances which led to the 86460