The title institute of the subject master thesis is not regulated by law, but it has been developed by the criminal law theory and case law. It is a situation in which a perpetrator fulfills the legal signs of two or more offenses with one act. This raises the question of whether the punishment for all formally accomplished criminal offenses is also justified in material law.
Perpetrator in the title institute actually fulfills the legal signs of two or more criminal offenses, but ultimately he is responsible for only one criminal offense. Relation of vituality is established between formally accomplished criminal offenses. In this regard, three fundamental relations between criminal offenses have been formulated in criminal law theory.. These relations are the relation of specialty, the relation of subsidiarity and the relation of the consumption. In the relation of specialty we come from a comparison of two or more criminal offenses, one of which contains one or more legal signs that are narrower, broader or different, and consequently concretize a more general provision. In relation of subsidiarity, one offense is only the preliminary phase of another offense, where the delimitation of offenses is based on the "lex primaria derogat legi subsidiariae" rule. The relation of consumption between criminal offenses is given when a logical comparison of the legal signs of criminal offenses in a concurrence at the abstract level of the audit reveals that the criminal amount of one criminal offense is contained in the criminal amount of the other.
The master's thesis examines in detail the individual relations between the crimes and, through the relevant case-law illustrates the incidence and application of the concurrence institue practice. At the same time, different views of domestic and foreign criminal law theorists in connection with the title institute are presented.