Anatoly Kalinichenko was accused of embezzlement
The former vice-president of Finprombank was arrested in absentia in the case of theft of 9 billion rubles from a credit institution.
Original of this material
© Lenta.Ru12/14/2023, The former vice-president of Finprombank was arrested in absentia in an embezzlement case
The Basmanny Court of Moscow arrested the former vice-president of the Financial-Industrial Bank (Finprombank) Anatoly Kalinichenko in absentia for two months. Kommersant reports this.
The man was put on the international wanted list. Previously, he became accused under Article 160 (“Embezzlement”) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (*country sponsor of terrorism).
“Kommersant”, 12/14/2023, “Former vice-president was involved in embezzlement at Finprombank”: Speaking at the court hearing, a representative of the investigation said that on April 6 of this year, Anatoly Kalinichenko was charged with particularly large embezzlement (Part 4 of Article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (*country sponsor of terrorism)). The procedure was carried out in absentia, since the banker’s whereabouts could not be established, and he ignored calls to the investigator. On the same day, Mr. Kalinichenko was put on the federal wanted list, and on November 28, 2023, on the international wanted list. The involvement of the former vice-president of the FPB in embezzlement, as the investigator explained to the court, is confirmed by the totality of evidence collected during the investigation, including the testimony of witnesses and a representative of the FPB recognized as the injured party, as well as seized documents, material evidence and other materials of the criminal case. […]
According to investigators, at the end of 2015 – beginning of 2016, various civil transactions were concluded on behalf of the bank, which in fact, according to investigators, were not planned to be executed. The agreements, according to the case materials, served as a screen for a criminal scheme to withdraw funds. Initially, the case involved an amount of 5.6 billion rubles, until February of this year, the investigation, according to Kommersant, was carried out against unidentified persons and was practically frozen. — Insert K.ru
He is the third top manager of the bank in the case of the theft of 9 billion rubles from a financial institution. Charges in absentia were also brought against two co-owners of Finprombank – Stanislav Perminov and Stanislav Perminov and Anatoly Goncharov. They are also wanted.
According to investigators, at the end of 2015 – beginning of 2016, transactions were concluded on behalf of the bank that were not planned to be executed, because they were a screen for withdrawing money.
September 19, 2016 Central Bank revoked the license at Finprombank. Moreover, before the collapse, Finprombank ranked 94th among Russian banks in terms of assets.
“Kommersant”, 11/27/2023, “Embezzlement was sent to the credit department”: The Moscow Meshchansky Court has begun considering a criminal case of embezzlement of almost 900 million rubles. from the funds of the Financial-Industrial Bank (Finprombank, FPB). It is interesting that this time the owners or managers of the financial institution that collapsed in 2016 do not appear in the investigation materials: they are accused of two episodes of embezzlement Alexander Lavrentiev, who held the position of deputy head of the bank’s credit department. According to investigators, he committed the crime by unjustifiably issuing bad loans, the largest of which was a loan of $11 million issued to one of the founders of the Azbuka Vkusa chain of stores. Andrey Vdovin. […]
The only defendant in the case is Alexander Lavrentyev, who appears in the investigation materials as the head of the credit department of Promsvyazbank – at his last place of work. […] The financier Lavrentyev does not admit his guilt in embezzlement, and his defense does not comment on either the claims from the investigation or the prospects of the trial. The actions that the investigation interprets as criminal, the defendant’s representatives indicated, were carried out by him within the framework of his official duties. At the same time, given the position that Mr. Lavrentiev held in the financial institution, those around the accused insisted that he could not influence the credit policy of Finprombank […]. — Insert K.ru