Cognac, coffee and shampoo brought Tula to mandatory work for a year and 9 months

In Novomoskovsk, a previously convicted man was sentenced to 1 year and 9 months of forced labor for three thefts from Pyaterochka and Magnit stores. The total cost of the stolen goods amounted to more than 39 thousand rubles, shared with the “MK in Tula” in the joint press service of the courts and the regional SDM.

As established by the magistrate of the judicial precinct No. 35 of the Novomoskovsk district, July 1, 2026, the man twice went to the same store "Pyaterochka" and brought the goods without paying them. Among the abductees were six bottles of cognac, meatcutting, two bags of coffee, 18 chocolates, three tubes of shampoo, after-shave balm and washing powder. The cost of goods amounted to 14 570 rubles.

The man committed another theft on July 28 in the Magnit store. From there, he brought expensive alcoholic beverages worth 24,550 rubles. In both cases, he put the goods in a bag, left the store and then disposed of the stolen at his own discretion.

On October 29, 2026, the court found the man guilty of three crimes. A previous sentence for a similar theft was also taken into account. According to the set of crimes, he was assigned 1 year and 9 months of forced labor with 10% of wages in the state income.

The court also fully satisfied the civil claim of JSC “Tander”: the convict must pay the company 24,550 rubles. The arrest of the VAZ-21104 car, owned by the man, remained in force until the execution of the sentence in terms of compensation for damages. Until the sentence enters into force, he will remain under a warrant of not leaving and proper conduct.

The sentence has not yet entered into force and can be appealed.

Earlier, “MK in Tula” told about another case of theft of money: a resident of the Tula region withdrew from the account of his partner 400 thousand rubles and received a fine. The man took her bank card with the woman's permission, knowing that a large sum was due to enter the account soon. When her partner demanded the card back, he did not respond to her requests. Knowing the PIN code, the man withdrew money through an ATM. For the woman, this amount was significant material damage.