El representante de hecho y el artículo 27 del código penal peruano

• Autor: Nureña Correa, Christhian Anthony Paúl
• Formato: tesis doctoral
• Fecha de Publicación: 2017
• Institución: Universidad Nacional de Trujillo
• Repositorio: UNITRU-Tesis
• Lenguaje: español
• OAI Identifier: oai:dspace.unitru.edu.pe:20.500.14414/12662
• Enlace del recurso: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14414/12662
• Nivel de acceso: acceso abierto
• Materia: Código penal peruano; Investigación; Vacío legal; Penalidad

ABSTRACT Article 27 of the Peruvian Penal Code provides: "Whoever acts as a representative body authorized by a corporation or authorized partner of a company representative and takes the legal type of crime is responsible as author, although special items to substantiate the penalty of this type do not concur in it, but if the represented. "As provided in this article is only for the authorized representative, but not for the fact representative of creating a loophole in the penalty This paper aims to determine whether the failure to define the representative made in the Peruvian Penal Code has brought problems of impunity. Through field research sought to answer the question posed, after addressing a theoretical framework to the cognitive domain and proper conceptual management issue it has held that the failure to define the representative actually has brought problems of impunity for there is a loophole And also based on the analysis results have been obtained that after discussion and confrontation have led to arrive at conclusions and recommendations that the present investigation is concluded.