Article 372.

- Attack against documents that serve as evidence in the process

Whoever extracts, hides, alters, destroys or destroys objects, acts or documents
intended to be used as proof and entrusted to officials or others
persons for their custody by the competent authority that is aware of the process,
will be punished with such a deprivation of liberty sentence. One year does not exceed
four years.
If the destruction or mutilation occurred due to negligence, the penalty shall be
from prison for up to one year or from twenty to forty days of forced labor

For this reason, through Article 372 of the Penal Code, we talk about defending a
of the nuclear institutions of the science of the process in general, such as
the evidential media. Now, in the same way that the article is written
372, what is actually penalized is the defense put forward against the probable
alterations that those evidentiary means may suffer that are found with the
purpose of 'accrediting' an argumentation of one of the pieces in the process.
The evidence in the process has essential significance, because it is the
the most reliable means to find the real reality and, at the same time, the greatest guarantee
against the arbitrariness of judicial elections
In other words, with the crime of attacking the means of evidence in the
process (Article 372 of the Penal Code) what is sought is that the means of
test enter the process unscathed regarding their nature
instrumental, for the performance of objects, records or documents in the
the process achieved to be fully controllable by the parts and, of course,
so that the respective judicial appraisal of the evidence is fully reliable
by the judge.
In Article 373 of the Penal Code, following the same line of custody of
determinados objetos que sirven en un proceso judicial, se sanciona el delito de
extraction of objects seized by authority, under the following wording: "The
who removes objects seized by the authorities will be punished with a penalty
deprivation of independence no less than 2 and no more than 4 years.

Typical behavior
Subtract: as Rojas Vargas warns, "Extracting to then restore can
become an irrelevant fact if it is not discovered, detected and
denounced.
Hide The difference from the extraction action, here the thing may not be.
removed from the physical site where it was, in other words, the representative places it
in the same environment of predominance in a situation that cannot be seen or
found by the custodian regarding classic behavior of concealment
from documents, a supreme ruling has said the following: 'According to how it'
has the indictment of the Provincial Prosecutor, processing order and order of
prosecution, the aforementioned accused was reported and charged for the offense provided in the
article 372 of the Penal Code; which, on the other hand, with the memorandums issued
by the reporting Judge against the accused in his capacity as an acting witness, it is accredited
that this last one deliberately concealed the file until his disappearance which
He was recording in the Court Clerk's Office under his charge. The typical case of modification is
shows once that the active individual fraudulently supplies the movable property,
record or the file designated to be evidence in a process similar to
for which there is no usable custody interaction. Meanwhile, the action of
devastación se configura una vez que el mánager, en forma dolosa, aniquila o
destroys the movable property, record or file designated to serve as evidence in a process
judicial or administrative.
The clear thing is that the criminal offense, in the first paragraph, does not require that the file, object, or
records have been entered in the proceedings of a process, and that once
entered may be "hidden", "withdrawn", "changed", "destroyed", etc.
it is sufficient for the file, object or records to have a subjective purpose
directed towards a process and that the active individual must know about it
purpose.
Material objective
Records: they are the physical spaces that can be instrumented and enjoy expansion.
and where facts, accounts, legal acts are recorded, declared or certified,
etcetera, present or previous, official or private (property records,
protocols, inventories, spreadsheets, books, meeting minutes records, records
countables, catalogs, etc.
Documents: The concept of a document currently has the concept
functional material, that is. It is legally conceptualized as the
demonstrable capacity of a graphic sign, color, sound or technological device
to be included or incorporated into something natural or made by it
man, rustic or artificially complex. (For example, in the latter case,
computer documents
The substantiation of a process
The type of crime now refers to a record, document, or object that is intended
introduce as a test '...in the confirmation process...', that is, without
specify the class of the process, it can be explained to several, broad:
judicial procedures, administrative procedures, procedures
disciplinary in all cases.

Although the limitation of the type of crime in the comments comes from the point of
view of the instrumental object of the document presented in the process: "it is only
objectively characteristic of what is considered a means of proof." Any
a document or record that is not part of the specified evidence will be
irrelevant or will be subject to a criminal offense. For example, the destruction of
one page or pages of tax documents, especially
tax resolutions will not be considered typical in § 372, because
such tax resolutions, although they are relevant documents that confirm
the process does not have the following characteristics: test, at least in the
mentioned fiscal folder.
That the substantiation of the process be before a competent authority
The type of crime as a condition is indicated by the following sentence: '... to pretend to be'
test in the presence of competent authorities to certify the process...
say. the object, record or document has a process as a recipient, but it
grants legal authority: in the case of legal proceedings, the
competent authority, to be a judge, in the cases of the Ministry of State, the
The competent authority will be the prosecutor.

We believe that the inclusion of the term 'competent authority' for purposes of validity
penal is redundant because if the object, e.g. breaks a tape that contains
important records of public officials, but in the end they will be charged on the day
next, not recommended by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, but by the municipality, yes
the literal meaning of the specification is strictly regulated, we
It will conclude that these facts do not constitute a crime because they have been
abordados como instituciones "incompetentes". Por ello, consideramos que
the "destruction" or "falsification" of the evidence is only anticipated for the procedural end
for the one it is used for, regardless of the competition of the
authorities conducting the process.
Entrusted to the custody of an official or another person
The type of lenses can only be verified if the document, article, or record has been
entrusted previously to an official or another person for their custody.

Official surveillance means that the actions of the agent must occur after
that the object, record, or document intended as evidence
the process has been seen or monitored. If the act of the agent precedes the act
officially, the crime does not take place

Things (objects, records, or documents) can belong to

countries or individuals. It doesn't matter because what matters is that the authority
The competent authority that grants the guardianship ensures functional behavior.

El tiempo de comisión de un delito puede comenzar desde el momento de su

official extradition until their return is determined by official order of a
competent state employee. The delegation of the care and supervision of objects,
records or documents is an official formal act recognized by which a
the employee delegates such caring functions to another person or a third party. It is
this legal relationship between power and protection defines this crime against
public administration The high management represents the official custody, it is
to say, the defendant is not obliged to submit the books. Thus, it constitutes a crime.
against the administration of the State according to article 372 of the Penal Law
the theft, concealment, destruction or damage of objects or documents in possession of
distinct person from the agent; circumstances that do not occur in the present case.
it is clear from the cars that the defendant was acquitted in the embezzlement case,
from where minutes are obtained in which case you do not need to deliver the books that
they are not mentioned in the ledger nor is their act of bad faith proven

Subjective type
Section 372 deals with willful infringement; that is, the subject
must know at least three extremes of typical behavior: first, behavior
that performs ("less", "hide", "change, destroy" or invalidate); second,
must know the 'object', 'record' or 'document'; in third place, the
Fraud must include the awareness that the object of the aforementioned crime has a
specific purpose: present it as evidence to the competent authority for the
execution of the process, entrust the guardianship of an official or another.

The consent of subjective and transcendental factors is not required.

supposes that the spirit of appropriation in the agency merely separates the
presumption of deprivation of the presumption of nullity or destruction, and not as
element of criminal atypia

Typographical errors can occur because the active person does not know or ignores
what documents, records, or objects are presented as part of the process, because
he is convinced that the documents are useless because of their earlier date,
because he threw them in the trash. trash on the street and finally the truck collected it.
of municipal waste. The issue of impossibility or invincibility is under debate
here, and it will depend on the degree of trust with which the agent is ordered to
I exhibit a "typical behavior".
Degrees of development of the crime

Like all grave sin, it may allow incomplete forms of execution.

Although, being a grave sin, perfection can be reached long ago
time ("hide", "remove", "change", "destroy", etc.) The ultimate goal of the object of
the action (not recognized in the validation of the process carried out by the authority
competent). However, the highest death penalties for the commission of
the following: 'A typical description establishes
that the act was carried out simply because the agent removed or concealed
any document that I knew would be submitted as evidence. means to
justify the process before the competent authority

So the question is: When will paragraph 1 finally be implemented?

from article 372? The first assumption is, for example, when something is destroyed.
file, record or object. The second hypothesis is when said document,
the registration of the element finally does not occur due to it
attestation process, whatever it may be; for example, the active case was
intercepted by the prosecutor's office, in preparation for several original public acts,
they were burned in a room, and the documents had to be
delivered to the desks of some people the next day. Rights
civilians; we believe this crime ended here without waiting for the asset whose
if the certificate has been received, destroy the document. At least this too.
it happens when the owner of the state property drives his car to
civil court department and a third party manages to intercept the vehicle, except for the
previously mentioned public title. A person who tries to deceive
The public action will be guilty to some extent of the previous crimes.