{"?xml":{"@version":"1.0"},"edm:RDF":{"@xmlns:dc":"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/","@xmlns:edm":"http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/","@xmlns:wgs84_pos":"http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos","@xmlns:foaf":"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/","@xmlns:rdaGr2":"http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2","@xmlns:oai":"http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/","@xmlns:owl":"http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#","@xmlns:rdf":"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#","@xmlns:ore":"http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/","@xmlns:skos":"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#","@xmlns:dcterms":"http://purl.org/dc/terms/","edm:WebResource":[{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2/08c521f1-b65a-46fe-a1b7-32b145491aa1/PDF","dcterms:extent":"1538 KB"},{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2/e394b60d-dec0-4e6e-bd86-2ca82420e657/TEXT","dcterms:extent":"72 KB"}],"edm:TimeSpan":{"@rdf:about":"2013-2024","edm:begin":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2013"},"edm:end":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2024"}},"edm:ProvidedCHO":{"@rdf:about":"URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2","dcterms:isPartOf":[{"@rdf:resource":"https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-CFT6PFGK"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Pravnik"}],"dcterms:issued":"2013","dc:creator":"Ambrož, Matjaž","dc:format":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"številka:5/6"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"letnik:68"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"str. 289-315, 443-444"}],"dc:identifier":["ISSN:0032-6976","COBISSID:13238097","URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2"],"dc:language":"sl","dc:publisher":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Zveza društev pravnikov Slovenije"},"dc:subject":[{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"criminal law"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"kazensko pravo"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"kazniva dejanja"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"sodelovanje"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"storilci"}],"dcterms:temporal":{"@rdf:resource":"2013-2024"},"dc:title":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Sostorilstvo v primežu teoretičnih modelov in praktičnih izzivov|"},"dc:description":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"The institution of co-perpetration belongs to every day judicial decision making and can be considered as a matter of judicial routine. Nevertheless, it has always been raising theoretical dilemmas and disputes, whereas most of them were not artificially invented, but corresponded with real problems streaming for judicial reality. The article attempts to systematize the existing Slovenian legal doctrine of co-perpetration, whereas the author argues for the abolishment of traditional objective-subjective approach, which builds upon (inter alia) the finding, whether the actor acted with \"the will to be a perpetrator\". As an alternative the author discusses the idea of co-perpetration as a functional control over the act, which he accepts as a starting-point and at the same time points out its limitations. The author's utmost interest is not the pursuit of a certain meta-theory of co-perpetration, which can never be more than a vague set of principles. He is far more interested in certain specific dilemmas of the institution and tries to answer them through the dialogue with the judicial practice. Due to space limitations the article does not address the special issues of co-perpetration (such as omissions, attempt, delicta propria and negligent co-perpetration), which will be dealt in a separate contribution"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Institut sostorilstva je del vsakodnevnega pravosodnega odločanja in je v tem pogledu del pravosodne rutine. Po drugi strani je že od nekdaj predmet številnih teoretičnih dilem in sporov, ki večinoma niso umetno ustvarjeni, temveč imajo svoje oporišče v pravosodni stvarnosti. Prispevek je poskus sistematizirati obstoječo slovensko doktrino sostorilstva, pri čemer se avtor zavzema za odpoved tradicionalni in nekritični uporabi objektivno-subjektivnega merila, po katerem naj bi sodišče poleg teže prispevka ugotavljalo tudi \"storilsko voljo\". Kot alternativa temu merilu je v prispevku analizirana ideja o sostorilstvu kot funkcionalni oblasti nad dejanjem, ki jo avtor sprejema kot izhodišče, vendar je ne idealizira in opozarja na njene omejitve. Bolj kot za iskanje \"metaideje\" sostorilstva, ki ne more biti več kot skupek zelo splošnih vodil, gre avtorju za rešitev posameznih značilnih dilem instituta, odgovore na katere išče v dialogu s sodno prakso. V prispevku zaradi prostorskih omejitev niso obravnavana posebna vprašanja sostorilstva (opustitve, poskus, delicta propria, malomarno sostorilstvo), ki bodo predmet ločenega prispevka"}],"edm:type":"TEXT","dc:type":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"znanstveno časopisje"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"journals"},{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785"}]},"ore:Aggregation":{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2","edm:aggregatedCHO":{"@rdf:resource":"URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2"},"edm:isShownBy":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2/08c521f1-b65a-46fe-a1b7-32b145491aa1/PDF"},"edm:rights":{"@rdf:resource":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"},"edm:provider":"Slovenian National E-content Aggregator","edm:intermediateProvider":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"National and University Library of Slovenia"},"edm:dataProvider":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Univerza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta"},"edm:object":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2/maxi/edm"},"edm:isShownAt":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:doc-GMTD4AH2"}}}}