121 KB31 KB201320252020Šepec, Mihaletnik:46številka:6/7str. 1020-1029ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID_HOST:44118531URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-2RBPHX0EslLexperaPodjetje in deloSilobran| dogmatične dileme in sodna praksa|Self-defence is considered to be the oldest, most traditional and most classic reason for excluding the illegality of an individual's act, which otherwise fulfils the essence of a crime. At its core, this institute means that no one is obliged to subject himself to an unlawful attack and that everyone has the right to defend themselves against such an attack. But despite the traditional stability of this criminal law construct, it is anything but simple and theoretically finalized. Namely, many dogmatic dilemmas arise within the self-defence, which can also be a hard nut to crack for our case law. In this paper, I address two contemporary self-defence dilemmas. Namely, the question of goods that can be protected with self-defence, and whether self-defence can be used to take the life of another person in the interest of protecting propertySilobran velja za najstarejši, najbolj tradicionalni in najbolj klasični razlog izključitve protipravnosti posameznikovega dejanja, ki sicer izpolnjuje bit kaznivega dejanja. V svojem temelju ta institut pomeni, da se pravo ni dolžno uklanjati nepravu in da se ima vsakdo pravico braniti zoper protipravni napad. Kljub tradicionalni ustaljenosti tega kazenskopravnega konstrukta pa je vse prej kot enostaven in teoretično dokončno razdelan. V okviru silobrana se namreč pojavljajo številne dogmatične dileme, ki so lahko trd oreh tudi za našo sodno prakso. V tem prispevku sta obravnavani dve sodobni silobranski dilemi, in sicer vprašanje dobrin, ki jih s silobranom sploh lahko ščitimo, ter vprašanje, ali lahko v interesu zaščite premoženja s silobranom drugi osebi vzamemo življenjeTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia