{"id":599444,"date":"2026-07-21T14:45:44","date_gmt":"2026-07-21T11:45:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/korabelov.info\/2026\/07\/599444\/knew-the-password-for-privat24-and-had-someone-else-s-sim-card-a-serviceman-in-mykolaiv-region-stole-nearly-55-000\/"},"modified":"2026-07-21T14:45:47","modified_gmt":"2026-07-21T11:45:47","slug":"knew-the-password-for-privat24-and-had-someone-else-s-sim-card-a-serviceman-in-mykolaiv-region-stole-nearly-55-000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/korabelov.info\/en\/2026\/07\/599444\/knew-the-password-for-privat24-and-had-someone-else-s-sim-card-a-serviceman-in-mykolaiv-region-stole-nearly-55-000\/","title":{"rendered":"Knew the password for \"Privat24\" and had someone else's SIM card: a serviceman in Mykolaiv region stole nearly 55,000"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Pervomaiskyi City District Court of Mykolaiv Oblast sentenced a man to 5 years of imprisonment<\/strong> who gained access to another person’s account in the online banking service \u201cPrivat24\u201d, stole almost UAH 20,000<\/strong> from the account, and then took out three loans in the victim’s name for an additional UAH 35,000<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The verdict was delivered<\/a> on July 15, 2026.<\/p>\n

As the court established, at the time the crimes were committed the accused was a mobilized serviceman with the rank of senior soldier and served as a senior reconnaissance grenadier. He had previously been convicted twice for property crimes: in 2019 \u2014 to 4 years and 1 month, and in 2020 \u2014 to 4 years of imprisonment. He was released on August 4, 2023.<\/p>\n

While in Pervomaisk<\/strong>, the man knew the password for the victim’s personal account in \u201cPrivat24\u201d. From 20:48 on April 30 to 03:36 on May 2, 2025, he made 30 transfers<\/strong> from the victim’s bank account to his own card, to acquaintances’ accounts and to unidentified persons.<\/p>\n

Individual transaction amounts ranged from UAH 9<\/strong> to UAH 4,020<\/strong>. In total, UAH 19,973.58<\/strong> was stolen from the victim’s account. The defendant disposed of the money at his own discretion.<\/p>\n

In addition to the online banking password, the man had the victim’s SIM card, which he had previously obtained by deception. Using it, he again, without permission, accessed the victim’s account in \u201cPrivat24\u201d and took out three online loans<\/strong> in the account holder’s name.<\/p>\n

The first loan of UAH 23,000<\/strong> was taken out on May 2, 2025 at 04:21 from the lending institution CREDITPLUS_IPAY. Twenty minutes later the man, on behalf of the victim, received UAH 5,000<\/strong> from SmartywayV, and at 04:45 he again took out a loan from CREDITPLUS_IPAY for UAH 7,000<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

All the loaned money \u2014 a total of UAH 35,000<\/strong> \u2014 the defendant transferred to his own account over the next two hours. Thus, the total amount he unlawfully obtained was UAH 54,973.58<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

In court, the man fully admitted his guilt, did not dispute the facts set out in the indictment and stated that he had compensated the victim for material losses and moral damages. He asked not to be sent to a penal colony and to be given a suspended sentence with a probationary period.<\/p>\n

The verdict sets out the defendant’s position during the proceedings.<\/p>\n

\n

“The accused in the court session fully admitted his guilt for the criminal offenses charged, did not dispute any of the factual circumstances set out in the indictment, confirmed all the circumstances stated in the indictment, that indeed under the described circumstances he appropriated funds belonging to the victim, which he has already reimbursed, including moral damages. He sincerely repents for what he has done and asks to be sentenced with a probationary period.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Since the defendant admitted guilt and the parties did not dispute the factual circumstances, the court did not examine evidence regarding events that no one contested. At the same time, the case file contained a statement of account movements for the victim’s account, which confirmed the operations set out in the indictment.<\/p>\n

The court took into account the man’s sincere remorse and active assistance in uncovering the crimes as mitigating circumstances. No aggravating circumstances were established.<\/p>\n

At the same time, the court noted that the defendant was negatively characterized at his place of military service, had previously been repeatedly convicted for property crimes, evaded court and as a result was wanted.<\/p>\n

The verdict explains why the court refused to impose a suspended sentence.<\/p>\n

\n

“When choosing the punishment for the defendant, the court takes into account the nature and degree of gravity of the criminal offenses committed by him, the personality of the defendant, who fully admitted his guilt, is not registered with narcological or psycho-neurological dispensaries, however is negatively characterized at his place of service, was previously repeatedly convicted for crimes against property, evaded the court, as a result of which he was declared wanted.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The man was found guilty under part 4 of Article 185 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine<\/strong> \u2014 theft committed repeatedly during martial law, under part 1 of Article 361 of the Criminal Code<\/strong> \u2014 unauthorized interference with the operation of an automated system, and under part 2 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code<\/strong> \u2014 repeated fraud.<\/p>\n

For theft the court imposed 5 years of imprisonment<\/strong>, for interference with an information system \u2014 1 year of restriction of liberty<\/strong>, and for fraud \u2014 2 years of imprisonment<\/strong>. By absorbing the lesser penalties into the more severe one, the final term was 5 years’ imprisonment<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The term of the sentence will be calculated from the moment of the man’s actual detention \u2014 from 11:50 on June 14, 2026. He will remain in custody until the verdict comes into legal force.<\/p>\n

The verdict can be appealed to the Mykolaiv Court of Appeal within 30 days<\/strong> from the day of its pronouncement, and by the convicted person \u2014 from the moment of receiving a copy of the decision.<\/p>\n

Earlier we wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n