Magistro darbe siekiama pateikti išsamią nužudymą kvalifikuojančių požymių, didinančių šios veikos pavojingumą, numatytų Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso 129 straipsnio 2 dalyje bei kitų užsienio šalių įstatymuose, analizę. Palyginimui buvo pasirinkti Rusijos Federacijos, Lenkijos ir Vokietijos baudžiamieji įstatymai. Be to, darbe pateikiami kai kurie pavyzdžiai pagal Prancūzijos, Latvijos, Baltarusijos, Italijos bei Portugalijos baudžiamuosius įstatymus. Siekiant nuoseklaus ir nuodugnaus tyrimo, darbe visų pirma aptariama nužudymo samprata nacionalinės bei tarptautinės teisės kontekste, nagrinėjami šiai nusikalstamai veikai būdingi bruožai, trumpai apžvelgiamos nužudymų rūšys, teisės šaltinių, reglamentavusių nužudymus Lietuvoje, raida bei pagrindinės nužudymo sudėties objektyvieji bei subjektyvieji požymiai. Pagrindinėje darbo dalyje aptariamos nužudymą kvalifikuojančių požymių sąvoka, rūšys bei pateikiama išsami kiekvieno požymio analizė, lygiagrečiai aptariant minėtų valstybių baudžiamųjų įstatymų reglamentavimo panašumus ir skirtumus. Analizuojant nužudymą kvalifikuojančius požymius pagal nacionalinę ir užsienio valstybių teisę, aptariamos ir kvalifikuoto nužudymo atribojimo nuo paprasto ar privilegijuoto, o taip pat nuo kitų veikų, kuriomis kėsinamasi į žmogaus gyvybę, problemos, pateikiami konkretūs teismų praktikos pavyzdžiai. / The aim of the Master’s Thesis is to provide the comprehensive analysis of qualifying factors of murder which increase the danger of this act provided in Article 129 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania as well as in the laws of foreign states. The criminal laws of the Russian Federation, Poland and Germany have been chosen for comparison. In addition, some instances according to the criminal laws of France, Latvia, Belarus, Italy and Portugal are presented in the paper. In order to carry out the consistent and exhaustive investigation, first of all, the conception of a murder is discussed in the paper in the context of national and international law; the features typical for this criminal act are considered, the kinds of murders, development of the sources of laws regulating murders in Lithuania as well as the objective and subjective factors of the basic corpus delicti of a murder are briefly reviewed. The major part of the paper deals with the discussion of the conception and kinds of the qualifying factors of a murder and comprehensive analysis of each qualifying factor and, in parallel, consideration of similarities and differences of regulation of the criminal laws in the said states. While analyzing the qualifying factors of a murder according to the national law and the law of the foreign states, the problems of delimitation of a qualified murder from simple or privileged murders as well as other life-threatening acts are discussed and the... [to full text]

.

La repr?sentation spatiale de l?aire de mod?lisation dans les mod?les de la demande de transports a peu chang? au cours des derni?res d?cennies. A cet ?gard, l??tat-de l?art repose encore largement sur le syst?me de centro?de-connecteur qui est utilis?e dans les mod?les classiques. Elle est une approche agr?g?e qui ignore la variabilit? physique li?e ? la dispersion des lieux d?sagr?g?s de r?sidence et d?activit? dans l?espace local. En cons?quence, le pouvoir explicatif des mod?les quant aux comportements de choix d?itin?raire et de mode demeure limit? ? l??chelle locale : Par exemple, la localisation d?sagr?g?e influence sur le choix entre une autoroute dont l??changeur est ?loign?, et un autre itin?raire non-autoroutier. Egalement, le rabattement terminal influence sur le partage modal auto vs. transports en commun. Nous pr?sentons une approche d?sagr?g?e pour la repr?sentation spatiale. Dans un d?coupage zonal, l?espace ? l?int?rieur d?une zone est repr?sent? de mani?re d?sagr?g?e stochastique. Pour chaque zone, les points d?ancrage sont d?finis relative aux n?uds du r?seau qui peuvent ?tre utilis?s pour acc?der au r?seau. Un itin?raire entre une paire de zones est ensuite consid?r? comme une chaine, compos?e de deux trajets terminaux, correspondants aux sections intrazonales de l?itin?raire, et d?un trajet principal correspondant ? la section entre deux points d?ancrage. En cons?quence, le mod?le de choix d?itin?raire est transform? ? un mod?le de choix conjoint d?une paire de point d?ancrage. Le vecteur des temps al?atoires terminaux est Normal Multidimensionnel donnant lieu ? un mod?le Probit de choix conjoint de points d?ancrage.Pour ?tendre au cadre multimodal, un mode collectif composite est d?fini comme une chaine compos?e des trois trajets modaux d?acc?s, principal, et de sortie, et les stations sont consid?r?es comme les points d?ancrage, connectant les trajets de rabattement au trajet principal. Un mod?le Logit Multinomial de choix de mode est estim? ? partir de l?Enqu?te Globale de Transport de 2001 pour le mode auto et le faisceau des modes collectifs composites, et est combin? avec les deux mod?les Probit correspondants au choix des stations / Spatial representation of modeling area in travel demand models has changed little over the course of last several decades. In this regard, the state-of-the-art still widely relies on the same centroid-connector system that has been used in classic models. In this approach continuum bidimensional space is lumped on centroids. It is an aggregate approach which ignores the physical variability linked to the scatteredness of disaggregate residence- and activity-places over the local space. Consequently the modeling performance in explaining route and mode choice behavior degrades at local scales: In route choice, disaggregate location influences the propensity between a distant interchange to a highway, or a nearby road. In mode choice, feeder service to public transportations influences the auto vs. transit modal share. We propose a disaggregate approach for spatial representation. Based on a zoning system, a stochastic disaggregate representation is used to characterize the space within a traffic analysis zone. For each zone, anchor-points are defined as the network nodes that are used for accessing to the network from within the local space. An itinerary between a pair of zones is then considered as a chain of legs composed of two terminal legs, corresponding to the intrazonal route sections, and one main leg between two anchor points. The route choice problem is transformed to a joint choice of a pair of anchor points. The vector of random terminal travel times is Multivariate Normal resulting in a Multinomial Probit model of choice of a pair of anchor points. To extend to the multimodal context, a transit composite mode is defined as a chain of access, main, and egress modal legs, and transit platforms are considered as anchor points connecting the feeder legs to the main line-haul leg. A Multinomial Logit mode choice model is estimated based on the 2001 Paris Household Travel Survey for the auto mode and the composite transit modes. It is joined with the two Multinomial Probit models corresponding to the choice of anchor points. The result is a joint model of mode and station choice with a disaggregate representation of the local space