Service member did not appear at the unit and worked at a tire service: court imposed punishment

The Khmelnytskyi City District Court of Khmelnytskyi region reviewed a criminal case against a service member accused of evading military service duties by deception during martial law, in prior conspiracy with a group of persons.

The court considered the approval of a plea agreement concluded between the prosecutor and the accused, and also determined the type and term of punishment. As a result, the court approved the agreement, found the service member guilty, and sentenced him to five years of imprisonment with probation.

Case essence № 686/18816/26

The court established that the accused, being a military service member mobilized, served as a reserve sergeant in the 106th reserve company of the military unit. He was healthy and fit for military service, holding the rank of junior sergeant.

According to the criminal case materials, the service member, acting intentionally during martial law, in prior conspiracy with a group of persons and with the assistance of others whose materials are separated into a separate criminal case, intended to temporarily evade military service duties.

The court found that from October 6, 2025, to November 28, 2025, the accused was actually absent from the place of military service and did not perform his duties as a service member. Instead, he engaged in activities unrelated to military service, namely unofficially working at the "4kolesa" tire service in the city of Vyshhorod, Kyiv region.

Meanwhile, other persons, whose materials are in a separate proceeding, allegedly ensured the concealment of his unjustified absence from the military unit. They created the appearance of the service member being involved in service tasks outside the military unit, helped to omit the fact of his absence from personnel records, and provided false information to the command about his supposed performance of service tasks.

Thus, the service member was charged with evading military service duties by deception, committed during martial law in prior conspiracy with a group of persons, which is a criminal offense under part 2 of article 28 and part 4 of article 409 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

On June 22, 2026, a plea agreement was concluded between the prosecutor and the accused with the participation of his defender.

The service member fully and unconditionally admitted his guilt in committing the criminal offense under the circumstances stated in the indictment.

The parties agreed on a punishment of five years imprisonment with application of article 75 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine regarding release from serving the sentence with probation and imposition of obligations according to article 76 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

The parties also agreed on the recovery of procedural costs for conducting expert examinations in the criminal case in the amount of 2228.50 UAH from the accused.

Position and conclusions of the court

The court noted that the accusation against the service member under part 2 of article 28 and part 4 of article 409 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is justified.

The accused fully admitted guilt, understood the rights defined in paragraph 1 of part 4 of article 474 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the consequences of concluding and approving the agreement as provided in part 2 of article 473 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the nature of the accusation, the type of punishment, and other measures that may be applied if the agreement is approved by the court.

The court found that the plea agreement was concluded voluntarily and was not the result of violence, coercion, threats, or other unlawful circumstances.

The content, conditions, and procedure of the agreement comply with the requirements of articles 469 and 472 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The court found no grounds for refusal to approve the agreement as provided in part 7 of article 474 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

The court took into account that the prosecutor considered the circumstances defined in article 470 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine when concluding the agreement.

The punishment agreed upon by the parties was recognized by the court as corresponding to the general principles of sentencing, not contradicting the interests of society, fair, necessary, and sufficient for correcting the accused and preventing new criminal offenses.

An aggravating circumstance was the commission of the criminal offense by a group of persons in prior conspiracy.

At the same time, the court considered mitigating circumstances. In particular, the service member had no prior criminal record, actively assisted in solving the criminal offense, sincerely repented, was positively characterized, voluntarily transferred 80,000 UAH to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine, supports a minor child, and had positive characteristics at his place of military service and work.

Considering the nature of the act, the method of its commission, social danger, the personality of the accused, and the above circumstances, the court concluded the necessity to approve the agreement and impose the agreed punishment with application of articles 75 and 76 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

Court decision

The court approved the plea agreement concluded on June 22, 2026, between the prosecutor and the service member.

The accused was found guilty under part 2 of article 28 and part 4 of article 409 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and sentenced to five years imprisonment.

Based on article 75 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the court released him from serving the sentence with probation, setting a probation period of two years.

The court also imposed obligations on him: to periodically appear for registration with the probation authority, to notify about changes in residence, work, or study, and not to leave Ukraine without the consent of the authorized probation body.

The court canceled the preventive measure in the form of bail and ordered the return of the bail amounting to 121,120 UAH to the depositor.

Additionally, procedural costs for expert examinations amounting to 2228.50 UAH were recovered from the accused in favor of the state budget.

The arrest on property imposed during the pre-trial investigation was lifted. The physical evidence — a Samsung mobile phone — was returned to the owner.

The verdict may be appealed to the Khmelnytskyi Court of Appeal through the Khmelnytskyi City District Court within 30 days from the date of its announcement in the manner prescribed by article 394 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, pages on Facebook and Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.