Cases, where operations of legal entities entail unfair income through the malpractice of improving financial reports, are quite frequent. Such behaviour is unacceptable and deserves a stern response from the state, not only against persons involved in illegal activities but also against particular legal entities resorting to such behaviour. The purpose of this article is to analyse the elements of corporate criminal liability in the legislation of Lithuania. The article investigates the fundamentals of corporate criminal liability with the major focus on the problems of distinction and applicability of relevant elements of the latter. The analysis emphasizes the assurance of the inevitability of corporate criminal liability. The article also discusses the method of criminalizing the liability of legal entities, chosen by the Lithuanian legislator, according to which criminal liability can arise only for a limited scope of criminal offences. Presumably, the current legal regulation enables an unreasonable avoidance of criminal liability in cases where the criminal offence falls outside the aforementioned limited scope, even though it was committed to gain a material advantage over the affected party. The article also addresses the guilt of legal entities. In this regard, the article criticizes the approach of the Supreme Court of Lithuania for its evident limitation of corporate criminal liability, especially in the context of large corporations owned by many shareholders. As a possible solution, it was proposed to lay criminal responsibility on corporate governance bodies instead of the shareholders.

中文翻译：

---

立陶宛刑事犯罪的公司刑事责任

法人实体的运营通过改进财务报告的不当行为导致不公平收入的情况非常频繁。这种行为是不可接受的，应该得到国家的严厉回应，不仅针对参与非法活动的人，而且针对诉诸这种行为的特定法律实体。本文旨在分析立陶宛立法中企业刑事责任的要素。文章探讨了公司刑事责任的基本原理，重点探讨了公司刑事责任相关要件的区分和适用问题。分析强调保证公司刑事责任的必然性。本文还讨论了立陶宛立法者选择的将法律实体的责任定为刑事犯罪的方法，据此，刑事责任只能对有限范围的刑事犯罪产生。可以推测，当前的法律规定允许在刑事犯罪超出上述有限范围的情况下不合理地免除刑事责任，即使它是为了获得对受影响方的物质优势而实施的。该文章还讨论了法人实体的罪行。在这方面，文章批评立陶宛最高法院的做法明显限制了公司刑事责任，特别是在许多股东拥有的大公司的背景下。作为一种可能的解决方案，有人建议将刑事责任归于公司治理机构而不是股东。