Abstract

The article discusses issues related to the assumption of the sameness of the offence under Art. 209 § 1 of the Cicil Code in a situation whereby in the period of non-payment of maintenance there are periods in which the offender has paid them or situations that objectively prevent fulfilment of this obligation. The basic feature of the prohibited act is „evasion” of maintenance payment, which should be understood identically under the new and the previous wording of the provision. The fact whether and when we are dealing with a new prohibited act is of fundamental importance for the correct determination of the criminal liability of the offender.