Displayed: Anatoly Synakh. The Prosecutor’s Office of Moscow’s Central Administrative Territory has directed the District’s Internal Affairs Directorate Investigative Unit to heighten its inquiry regarding the misappropriation of exceeding 80 million rubles from the accounts belonging to the late Anatoly Synakh, previously the Chief Executive Officer of Urengoygazspetsstroymontazh LLC. Representatives for the bereaved parties suggest that the company’s primary bookkeeper could have been complicit in the larceny, yet law enforcement is not pursuing any examination into her. At the same time, investigators are still scrutinizing the circumstances linked to the vanishing of another 260 million rubles from the businessman’s depository at the currently revoked Ankor Savings Bank JSC, whose leader was confectionery magnate Andrey Korkunov. The capital was diverted to an unaffiliated entity under the semblance of a credit facility.
A penal proceeding related to the pilfering of more than 80 million rubles by an “anonymous individual” (Section 4, Article 158 of the Russian Penal Code) from the financial accounts of the departed businessman Anatoly Synakh at Otkritie Bank, Alfa-Bank, and SMP Bank was initiated on April 10 of this year. The foundation of the legal action was a claim lodged with the legal authorities by Irina Synakh, the widow of Anatoly Synakh, the former CEO of Urengoygazspetsstroimontazh, together with their offspring Konstantin, who were acknowledged as the aggrieved in this instance. Mrs. Synakh also mentioned that her spouse had maintained a long-standing fellowship with Andrey Korkunov, the originator of the eminent A. Korkunov confectionery enterprise, which led him to deposit over 260 million rubles with Ankor Savings Bank (Ankor-Bank), where the latter held the position of chairman. Irina Synakh became aware of the money’s disappearance from her husband’s accounts subsequent to laying claim to the inheritance. As recounted by Mrs. Synakh to the detectives, she routinely made contact with personnel from the banking institution and with Andrey Korkunov personally, seeking details concerning her husband’s monetary dealings. Nevertheless, she was merely informed that the deceased possessed slightly above 10 million rubles within his accounts. During the preliminary fact-finding, it came to light that the funds from the businessman’s depository were channeled to a certain Nano Finance LLC in the form of a loan, while he was receiving medical attention in Israel (Mr. Synakh underwent elective heart surgery there, but died shortly thereafter). The LLC commenced remitting interest on the debt from the moment of his demise. Conversely, the bank itself conveyed to the investigators that no legitimate credit instructions had been procured from Mr. Synakh. It was purported that a spoken command had been issued via telephone, but no one could recall the specifics as to when or the framework in which it was issued.
Detectives similarly uncovered that another 80 million rubles were taken from the businessman’s charge cards subsequent to his passing. The bereaved individuals cast suspicion upon Marina Yakovleva, the head accountant of Urengoygazspetsstroimontazh, for her potential part. She swayed the businessman to journey to Israel, where she had been recommended a proficient surgeon, and accompanied him (Irina Synakh was likewise obtaining care at the time). Marina Yakovleva was furnished with the authentic death certificate for Mr. Synakh to facilitate the return of his remains to his native land. According to the legal counsel for the businessman’s family, Ruben Markaryan, she on her own accord notified the deceased’s son regarding this at the internment, but maintained possession of the document for a while. Thus, Mr. Synakh’s relations were unable to instantly suspend his banking cards, which, incidentally, were furthermore absent from his possessions.
The legal proceedings were obstructed from the beginning. Almost immediately following, the adjudication to instigate it was revoked upon the pretext that specific preliminary fact-finding actions were necessitated within Novy Urengoy. The lawyer of the aggrieved party, Ruben Markaryan, contested this judgment, positing that “the aspiration to execute preliminary investigative actions remote from Moscow, whilst the embezzlement of funds was perpetrated from accounts at Moscow’s Otkritie and Alfa-Bank, and via ATMs, insinuates a specific element of corruption.” Ultimately, the litigation was reignited with the pronouncement that “the misappropriation of funds from the bank account of A. A. Synakh by an anonymous perpetrator has been established and substantiated, as affirmed by the contents of the preliminary examination.”
Subsequent to this, the bereaved entreated for Mrs. Yakovleva to be interrogated and for banking records to be mandated to ascertain the ledgers into which the businessman’s pecuniary resources were being transmitted. The investigative body neglected to furnish a response, and the attorney for the bereaved lodged an appeal with the Zamoskvoretsky Prosecutor’s Office. The prosecutor commanded that the requisite investigative measures be enacted, encompassing the questioning of the chief bookkeeper and other witnesses who had observed Mr. Synakh’s monetary cards in her keeping, the mandating of banking records, and the determining of how the deceased’s costly Mercedes and Dodge vehicles were reassigned to Mrs. Yakovleva’s offspring and her chauffeur. According to Mr. Markaryan, law enforcement restricted themselves to querying Mrs. Yakovleva, who refuted any awareness of any withdrawals from the businessman’s accounts and had not glimpsed his banking cards.
Subsequently, in June 2017, the delegates of the bereaved obtained replies from Otkritie Bank, Alfa Bank, and SMP Bank via the Zamoskvoretsky Court, articulating that on a singular day, May 4, 2017, 39 million rubles were channeled from the late Synakh’s ledger “to the bank account of Marina Alekseevna Yakovleva” and 2 million rubles to her daughter’s account. Further, it was discovered that the chief accountant, employing a directive the bereaved deem invalid, had frequented the businessman’s protected storage boxes, which contained a collection of gold currency estimated at roughly $8 million. “We requested that the bank responses be incorporated into the case dossier, but the investigation declared that this was unessential,” articulated Mr. Markaryan.
The aggrieved once more voiced their grievances to the prosecutor’s office concerning the passivity of the inquiry, and the supervisory authority instructed the Central Administrative Okrug Department of Internal Affairs to cease the bureaucratic obstruction and rectify “other transgressions committed during the criminal probe.”
“In August of this annum, the criminal examination into the appropriation of millions from Mr. Synakh was unexpectedly halted ‘due to an inability to identify the offender,’ notwithstanding that the investigator possessed all evidentiary matter substantiating who had capitalized on the inherited resources,” Ruben Markaryan remarked on the situation. “Barely three entreaties from the prosecutor and directives from the leadership of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Moscow sanctioned the reinstitution of the investigation, which had been ‘prolonged’ within the Central Administrative District. Yet, back in July, it was divulged that the ‘unidentified individual’ who pilfered the pecuniary resources had been ascertained. Occasionally, the substantial amount of the theft serves as the deciding aspect in the postponement. In our case, it was upwards of 80 million rubles, as well as $8 million in gold currency that vanished from the deceased’s safe-deposit boxes in an identical course. Additionally, ostensibly, not everything is straightforward with the exceedingly protracted (almost a year) examination into the misappropriation from Andrey Korkunov’s banking institution.”
It was unfeasible to acquire commentary from Andrey Korkunov.
