The Savelovsky Court of Moscow placed under house arrest Alexander Goshin, the owner of the law firm Goshin Group, which offers services for the collection of overdue debts and, judging by its website, is a partner of a number of leading credit institutions, including Sberbank, VTB, Uralsib and “Absolute”. The Investigative Committee of Russia, according to Kommersant, accuses the head of a law firm of illegally trying to take possession of a building in the north of Moscow worth 205 million rubles. Mr. Goshin himself denies the accusation, and his defense insists that the principal is the legal owner of the disputed building, calls the accusation absurd and links the criminal case to a conflict between the owner of Goshin Group and his business partner.
According to Kommersant’s sources, Alexander Goshin was detained a few hours before the meeting of the Savelovsky District Court. This happened after the lawyer voluntarily came for questioning to the investigative department of the ICR for the Northern District of Moscow, which has been investigating the theft of the building since November 2022. About an hour after the arrest, Mr. Goshin was charged with attempted fraud on an especially large scale (Article 30 and Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). After that, the lawyer was interrogated already in a new procedural status, and the investigator, without wasting time, applied to the Savelovsky District Court with a request to select a measure of restraint. Moreover, in his appeal to the court, the employee of the TFR insisted on the conclusion of the general director of the law firm in a pre-trial detention center.
Speaking already at the court session, the author of the petition confirmed his demand, substantiating it with the standard arguments for such cases that Mr. Goshin, while remaining at large, can hide, put pressure on witnesses, destroy evidence in the case or otherwise obstruct the investigation.
The defense of the accused, in turn, drew the attention of the court to the fact that their client is the legal owner of the property, the attempted theft of which the ICR incriminates him, which, according to the lawyers, makes it “physically impossible” for their client to have criminal intent.
As a result, after listening to the arguments of the parties, the district court refused to satisfy the petition of the investigation, but nevertheless sent the lawyer under house arrest, which will last until April 18.
According to Kommersant’s sources, the materials of the case involving Alexander Goshin refer to the events of 2022. According to the Investigative Committee of Russia, at that time the general director of the Goshin Group developed a criminal plan, the purpose of which was to seize the building in 1st Nizhnelikhoborsky Lane, owned by Future trade Ltd. After that, the case says, without informing the beneficiary of this company, Mr. Goshin produced various forged documents that allowed the sale of the building to third parties. However, the defendant failed to complete the criminal plan: the scam, according to the investigation, failed at the final stage due to the lack of a complete package of necessary documents. It is for this reason, according to law enforcement officers, that the lawyer failed to register the sale and purchase transaction. The investigation estimates the value of real estate at 205 million rubles, this amount is called in the case as damage.
It should be noted that the law firm Goshin Group, founded in 2011, specializes in working with distressed assets and collecting overdue debts. Judging by the data posted on the company’s website, since 2015 it has been a partner of Sberbank, VTB, Uralsib and Absolut banks. In addition, the owner of the law firm also works as the general director of NPP Automated Security Systems Record, which installs various security-related equipment for the structures of the National Guard and the Federal Penitentiary Service.
Denis Pronkin, the lawyer’s lawyer, considers the criminal prosecution of his client illegal, and the logic of the prosecution is absurd. As the lawyer emphasized, the beneficiary of the company that owns the building in Nizhnelikhoborsky Lane is precisely his principal. “How Mr. Goshin can organize the theft of his property under such circumstances, I do not understand. But the investigation stubbornly insists on this and does not hear our arguments,” said Mr. Pronkin. The lawyer linked the initiation of a criminal case and an attempt to arrest his client with a corporate conflict that occurred last year between Mr. Goshin and one of his business partners.