A woman couldn't shop at Auchan because security called the police. What happened, and what was the court's decision?

A woman was accused of stealing goods worth a total of 289 hryvnias. The security of Auchan called the police, but she claims that she encountered issues while checking out at the self-service register. This is stated in the ruling of the Kyiv-Sviatoshyn District Court of Kyiv Oblast, published on July 29, 2024.

On July 25, 2024, at 14:26, the woman secretly stole products from the Auchan hypermarket totaling 289 hryvnias. She committed an administrative offense under part 1 of article 51 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (KUpAP). At the court hearing, the citizen explained that she did not intend to steal and was paying at the self-service register; before processing each item, a store employee noted that the self-service registers were malfunctioning.

The woman immediately offered the security guards to inspect and verify the goods she had taken from the sales floor, stating that if there was any mistake, she would pay for everything right away. However, they called the police, and the citizen settled the payment for the unpaid goods immediately. The video attached to the protocol revealed that there were four video files on the disks, and the fact of theft was not recorded.

From the written explanations of the security guard, it is evident that he is convinced of the necessity to detain the woman, who had committed thefts multiple times, although there is no evidence in the case materials that she had previously been held administratively liable under article 51 of the KUpAP. Additionally, a statement from the inspector of the security department of LLC "Auchan Ukraine Hypermarket" was attached to the protocol, requesting to hold her accountable for petty theft of goods.

What punishment did the court choose?

The court closed the proceedings in the case of bringing the woman to administrative responsibility under part 1 of article 51 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (protocol series VAB No. 659240 dated July 25, 2024). Her actions did not constitute an administrative offense.