Arson (Germany)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Consequences of arson: Fire in the north tower of the Göttingen St. John's Church on January 23, 2005.

The arson is the subject of German criminal law in several stages ( offenses ) . The arson offenses count among the publicly dangerous offenses and are standardized in the 28th section of the special part of the Criminal Code in § 306 to § 306f StGB.

Arson offenses focus on two acts: setting something on fire and destroying it by setting fire to it. These acts are subject to a higher threat of punishment if the act is directed against certain objects, has serious consequences for third parties or is carried out for particularly reprehensible motives.

According to police crime statistics , 19,123 cases of Sections 306–306f StGB were reported in Germany in 2016 .

History of origin

In the Holy Roman Empire , the first uniform criminal law regulation of arson was carried out by the Constitutio Criminalis Carolina of 1532, which endeavored to harmonize the numerous divergent criminal law regulations. According to Article 125, anyone who consciously started a fire was punished by burning or beheading. Later laws, such as the Codex Iuris Bavarici Criminalis of 1751 and the Prussian General Land Law of 1794, added the feature of public danger to the offense of arson. In contrast, the Bavarian penal code of 1813 and the Prussian penal code of 1851, based on the code penal of 1810, placed the infringement of someone else's property at the center of the arson. The public danger of the act was particularly punitive.

The current fire criminal law is based on §§ 306-310 of the Reich Criminal Code , which came into force on January 1, 1872.

The burning Reichstag on 27/28. February 1933

The fire criminal law was changed for the first time by the federal legislature with effect from September 1, 1969. In the course of the abolition of the prison , a prison with aggravating prison conditions, the threat of prison sentence was removed from the law and replaced by the threat of prison sentence.

A comprehensive revision of the fire criminal law, which in large parts led to a new version of the arson offenses, was carried out by the sixth criminal law reform act of 1998. With this reform, the legislature aimed on the one hand to structure the fire criminal law more clearly. On the other hand, he wanted to adapt it to the current state of the art, for example with regard to the increasing use of refractory building materials.

The arson offenses are characterized by a comparatively high minimum penalty: Most offenses that require intentional action on the part of the offender provide for a minimum penalty of one year imprisonment or higher, which is why they are crimes according to Section 12 (1) of the Criminal Code . This high threat of punishment is based on the fact that the arson offenses basically pursue a double protection purpose: On the one hand, the property of those whose property is damaged by a fire is protected. On the other hand, they protect the general public from the dangers typically associated with arson. Against the background of these two protective purposes, and in view of the high threat of punishment for arson offenses, efforts arose in jurisprudence to apply some norms, contrary to their wording, only to a limited extent , if in a specific case there was no public danger in the act.

Fire criminal law comprises seven norms, Sections 306–306f StGB. It is based on the basic offenses of simple arson ( § 306 StGB) and serious arson ( § 306a StGB). Both offenses are classified as particularly serious arson ( Section 306b of the Criminal Code) , i.e. they are subject to a higher threat of punishment. If the perpetrator causes the victim's death through the act, the relevant regulation is arson resulting in death ( Section 306c StGB). § 306d StGB makes negligent arson a punishable offense. Section 306e of the Criminal Code gives the perpetrator the opportunity, after committing the offense, to obtain mitigation or exemption from punishment if he appears repentant . Finally, § 306f StGB, as an independent offense, criminalizes acts by which someone creates a fire hazard .

Arson, § 306 StGB

The object of arson in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Code is the damage to or destruction of a specific object by fire. This is a qualified form of property damage ( Section 303 StGB). The current version of § 306 StGB has been as follows since its last change on April 1, 1998:

(1) Become a stranger

  1. Buildings or huts,
  2. Business premises or technical facilities, namely machines,
  3. Warehouses or inventories,
  4. Motor vehicles, rail vehicles, aircraft or watercraft,
  5. Forests, heaths or moors or
  6. agricultural, nutritional or forestry installations or products

sets on fire or completely or partially destroyed by a fire is punished with imprisonment from one year to ten years.

(2) In less serious cases, the penalty is imprisonment from six months to five years.

Because of its minimum penalty of one year imprisonment, arson is a crime. Therefore, according to Section 23 (1) of the Criminal Code, the attempt and according to Section 30 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Code certain preparatory acts are punishable.

Objective fact

Object of crime

Section 306 (1) of the Criminal Code finally names six categories of objects that can be the subject of arson. The legislature selected these on the basis of their particular financial, social or economic significance. However, since most of the terms listed in this catalog describe a wide range of objects, they are to be interpreted restrictively in view of the high threat of punishment of the standard. For example, thewording of Section 306, Paragraph 1, No. 6 of the Criminal Code is already fulfilled if someone deliberately allows food to be charred. However, an arson conviction would be disproportionate in such a case. Therefore, jurisprudence only considers objects suitable for arson if they have a significant value. As a lower limit, parts of the legal theory estimate a value of € 1,000.

The object of the crime must be foreign to the perpetrator, i.e. it must not be in his sole property . Due to this factual feature, it is controversial in jurisprudence to what extent Section 306 of the Criminal Code serves to protect the general public. Some lawyers argue that the standard is solely intended to protect property. They are based on the fact that the fulfillment of the offense presupposes that the offender is foreign to the offender. If the legislature wanted to protect the general public as well as property, this requirement would be senseless. Others oppose this view by stating that Section 306 of the Criminal Code is in the section on criminal offenses that are dangerous to the public and provides a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment that is disproportionate solely for reasons of property protection.

Notwithstanding this dispute, there is agreement that the owner of the property affected by the fire can consent to the act with justifying effect . Only the dogmatic derivation of this possibility of consent is disputed. Those who see the arson as a mere qualification of property damage only consider the owner, who can freely dispose of his legal interests, as the victim of the act. The opposite view, which, in addition to the owner, sees the general public as protected from the dangers of arson by Section 306 of the Criminal Code, justifies the possibility of consent by the fact that it eliminates part of the injustice of arson. The remaining injustice is not enough to accept arson.

Offense

Section 306 of the Criminal Code names two acts: setting a thing on fire and destroying it in whole or in part by setting fire to it.

Set on fire

A thing is set on fire if essential parts are caught in the fire in such a way that they can continue to burn on their own, i.e. without the continued effect of an explosive. Components that are necessary for the intended use of the item and that are firmly connected to the building are considered essential. The assessment is largely based on the view of the public. In buildings, for example, floors, window frames, room walls and stairs are essential elements. In contrast, furnishings are not essential parts. In vehicles, for example, the tires are considered to be essential components.

Destroy by burning

The type of inspection of total or partial destruction by fire was created by the legislature as part of the sixth criminal law reform act of 1998. The starting point for this was the fact that many building materials were meanwhile fire-resistant, which often prevented parts of buildings from continuing to burn on their own. However, setting the fire could also lead to great danger and considerable damage. Therefore, the legislature wanted to record their cause not only as damage to property, but as arson and thus open up a significantly higher range of penalties for the offense.

The fact of destruction by arson is broader than setting on fire, in that it is linked to any significant damage that is a result of the arson. This is a catch-all offense compared to the setting on fire. It thus gains independent significance for damage that was not caused by the fire itself, but by its consequences. These include the development of smoke or soot and the release of chemicals . Damage caused by the use of extinguishing agents is also included in the offense . Ultimately, destruction by fire comes into consideration if the primer explodes before the perpetrator can use it to set fire to something as planned.

An object is completely destroyed when it is no longer suitable for its intended use. Partial destruction occurs when an essential element of the thing becomes unusable, at least for a long time. The case law assumed this for an apartment building in a case in which a residential unit was so damaged that it was not habitable for some time.

Subjective fact

A criminal liability according to § 306 StGB requires that the offender acts at least with conditional intent with regard to the objective offense. He must therefore at least recognize and approve of the fact that his act will either set someone else's property on fire or destroy it.

attempt

There is an attempted arson if the perpetrator immediately starts arson with the necessary will to commit arson. Immediate action is given as soon as the perpetrator has taken all the essential steps from his point of view to cause the fire to break out. The case law already sees this as given when the perpetrator gets into the building to be ignited to spread fire accelerators and then start the fire.

Litigation and sentencing

The act is prosecuted ex officio as an official offense, so that a criminal complaint is not required. According to Section 306 (1) StGB, the range of punishment is between one and ten years imprisonment.

According to Section 306 (2) of the Criminal Code, the range of punishment is reduced to imprisonment between six months and five years if the case is less serious . The assumption of a less serious case comes into consideration if the guilt associated with the act is minor. This can apply, for example, if the act is only dangerous to a minor extent, the perpetrator tries to contain the effects of his act, or the act exclusively affects an object of minor value.

The arson is deemed to have ended when something has been destroyed by setting fire to something or by setting fire to it. From this point begins according § 78a of the Criminal Code, the limitation period . The statute of limitations for the act is ten years due to its scope of punishment in accordance with Section 78 (3) No. 3 StGB.

Law competitions

If further offenses are committed in connection with an act under Section 306 of the Criminal Code, these are in legal competition with arson . The realization of arson can result in unity of offense ( Section 52 StGB) with damage to property that is harmful to the general public ( Section 304 StGB), since this norm protects the interests of the public in addition to property. As a result, according to the absorption principle, despite the existence of several offenses, only one penalty is recognized. The destruction of important work equipment ( Section 305a of the Criminal Code) can also be part of an arson act , as this standard also protects general interests. Other property damage offenses with regard to the thing destroyed by the fire are superseded by the more specific Section 306 of the Criminal Code. Unity of offense also comes into consideration between arson and insurance abuse ( § 265 StGB).

Serious arson, § 306a StGB

Section 306a of the Criminal Code regulates the offense of serious arson. This threatens a minimum imprisonment of one year for arson, which is associated with a special danger for people. The norm stands independently next to Section 306 of the Criminal Code, as it dispenses with the feature of foreignness of the object of the crime and thereby pursues a different protective purpose: While Section 306 of the CriminalCode primarily protectsproperty interests, Section 306a of the Criminal Code primarilyservesto protect physical integrity. Since its last change on April 1, 1998, the standard has been as follows:

(1) Anyone who is punished with a custodial sentence not less than one year

  1. a building, a ship, a hut or any other space that serves as a home for people,
  2. a church or other religious building, or
  3. a space that is used temporarily for people to stay at a time when people usually stay there,

sets on fire or completely or partially destroyed by a fire.

(2) Anyone who sets a thing referred to in Section 306 (1) No. 1 to 6 on fire or completely or partially destroys it by setting fire and thereby puts another person at risk of damage to health will be punished.

(3) In less serious cases under paragraphs 1 and 2, the penalty is imprisonment from six months to five years.

Paragraph 1

Section 306a (1) of the Criminal Code links criminal liability to the setting on fire of rooms that are characterized by certain types of use. The focus is on protecting the health of people who typically stay in such a space. In that the norm ties in with the general dangerousness of the act, it represents an abstract endangering offense.

The offense includes rooms that are generally used as accommodation. This applies, for example, to apartments, mobile homes and truck beds. It is irrelevant whether there are people on the premises at the time of the act. A building loses its property as an apartment when the residents move out of the house. Difficulties can be found in assessing the property of a home in the case of properties that are used both for living and for other purposes. If the perpetrator only sets fire to the part that is not used for living, according to the case law, criminal liability under Section 306a (1) StGB comes into consideration in cases in which the building parts form a structural unit and in which it cannot be ruled out that this Fire can spread to the inhabited part. If the residents of a building decide not to use it as accommodation in the future, it is no longer designated as accommodation, so that it is excluded from the offense according to Section 306a (1) of the Criminal Code.

Furthermore, Section 306a (1) of the Criminal Code covers objects that are used for temporary residence. This applies, for example, to shops, warehouses or barns used by tramps as refuge. The offense is fulfilled if the act takes place at a time when people are usually there.

Objects of crime according to § 306a Paragraph 1 No. 2 StGB are also buildings that are used for religious practice. It does not matter whether people are in the building or tend to be in the building at the time of the crime. Therefore, unlike numbers 1 and 3, this provision does not serve to protect physical integrity. Rather, it aims to protect religious peace.

Some legal scholars are calling for a restrictive interpretation of Section 306a (1) of the Criminal Code by way of a teleological reduction in cases in which it is excluded that the act endangers the life of a person, since otherwise the high threat of punishment of the norm would be exaggerated. The jurisprudence only makes such a reduction in the case of small and clearly arranged rooms: a mitigation of the sentence is only advisable if the offender can judge with certainty that no one is in the room. This is only possible with small, manageable rooms, for example one-room huts.

Criminal liability under Section 306a, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code also presupposes that the offender acts willfully with regard to all elements of the offense. Since the standard is solely intended to protect people from the dangers associated with arson, justifying consent from the owner of the crime is not possible.

Paragraph 2

Section 306a (2) of the Criminal Code ties in with the arson in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Code and provides it with a higher threat of punishment if the offender intentionally puts another person at risk of damage to his health. This is the case when it depends purely on chance whether or not there is impairment to health. In contrast to Section 306 (1) of the Criminal Code, the norm does not punish the abstract danger of the act, but rather the cause of a specific danger. It thus represents a specific endangerment offense. This is implemented when the damage to health is related to a risk that typicallyarisesfrom arson. This applies, for example, to burn injuries and smoke inhalation as consequences of the crime.

Since the protection of health is the focus of Section 306a (2) StGB, the consent of the owner is irrelevant. However, the consent of the person at risk in his or her health has a justifying effect.

Particularly serious arson, § 306b StGB

The particularly severe arson regulated in Section 306b of the Criminal Code provides two cases of arson with an increased threat of punishment compared to Section 306 and Section 306a of the Criminal Code. The subject of Section 306b (1) of the Criminal Code is the cause of damage to health as a result of the arson. This is a qualification for success . Section 306b (2) of the Criminal Code names several circumstances that justify a particularly high threat of punishment. This is a qualification that ties in with the serious arson in accordance with Section 306a of the Criminal Code.

(1) Anyone who causes serious damage to the health of another person or damage to the health of a large number of people through arson in accordance with Section 306 or Section 306a shall be punished with imprisonment for no less than two years.

(2) A custodial sentence of not less than five years is to be recognized if the perpetrator in the cases of Section 306a

1. puts another person in danger of death by the act,
2. Acts with the intention of enabling or concealing another criminal offense or
3. The extinguishing of the fire prevented or made more difficult.

Paragraph 1

Section 306b (1) of the Criminal Code presupposes that the perpetrator has an aggravating, particularly serious consequence. As such, the standard cites causing serious damage to health. This is the case if the victim suffers from long-term health impairments as a result of the act. Causing simple damage to health can also fall under Section 306b (1) of the Criminal Code if a large number of people are affected. The Federal Court of Justice affirmed this in the case of fourteen victims. Other legal scholars suggest minimum numbers of three, ten, or twenty.

The punitive aggravating success must be based on the typical danger associated with an arson offense. Finally, according to Section 18 of the Criminal Code, it must at least be due to the negligence of the perpetrator. However, since it is a successful qualification, it does not need to be brought about intentionally.

Paragraph 2

Section 306b (2) of the Criminal Code lists three circumstances in which the minimum penalty increases to five years. Since these are qualifications, the offender must have included the realization of these characteristics in his intent.

It constitutes an aggravating circumstance to deliberately endanger the life of another person through arson.

There is also a case of Section 306b (2) of the Criminal Code if the perpetrator commits the arson with the intention of enabling or concealing another crime, i.e. this is his main motive. This characteristic corresponds to the murder characteristic of the intention to allow or to conceal . Due to the high threat of punishment, some legal scholars argue that only such offenses are to be regarded as other offenses, for the commission of which the perpetrator makes use of the dangerous situation of arson. This is the case, for example, by taking advantage of the panic and confusion caused by the fire. However, the case law does not follow this consideration, since the legislature did not have such a restriction in mind. Rather, the sole cause of the tightening of the penalties is the linking of the injustice of arson with further injustice. However, there is agreement that insurance fraud ( Section 265 of the Criminal Code) does not constitute any other act within the meaning of the standard. Because his act is to damage something, for example by arson. Thus, § 265 StGB and § 306a StGB are acts that are committed by the same act.

Ultimately, the perpetrator realizes the qualification if he deliberately makes it difficult or impossible to extinguish the fire, for example by rendering extinguishing devices unusable or by hindering the fire brigade's work.

Arson resulting in death, Section 306c StGB

In § 306c Criminal Code is another successful qualification of arson. She has a minimum penalty of ten years, making her the most serious arson offense.

If the perpetrator causes the death of another person at least recklessly through arson in accordance with Sections 306 to 306b , the penalty is life imprisonment or imprisonment not less than ten years.

The norm ties in with the commission of arson. Their act requires the perpetrator to cause the death of another person from a hazard that is specific to arson. For example, smoke poisoning, explosions or the collapse of building parts come into consideration.

The extent to which the perpetrator can be made responsible for the death of rescue workers is disputed. The previous regulation of Section 306c of the Criminal Code did not cover these persons, as it required that the victim was in the affected premises when the arson was committed. The new version of the standard dispenses with this criterion, so that the perpetrator can be held responsible for the death of helpers via Section 306c of the Criminal Code if this is attributable to him . This is possible, for example, if the victim enters the burning room unaware of the fire. If, on the other hand, the victim knows about the fire, his death can be attributed to the perpetrator if his intervention is a typical, comprehensible and therefore predictable reaction to the fire. This is regularly the case with professional emergency services. On the other hand, attribution is excluded if someone endangers himself in an unreasonable way, for example because the danger and the purpose of the rescue are not in an appropriate relationship to one another.

The perpetrator must cause the death of the victim recklessly , i.e. in a particularly negligent manner. This is the case when he disregards the imposing possibility of a fatal course out of particular recklessness or out of particular indifference.

At the competitive level, section 306c of the Criminal Code mostly displaces the other arson offenses as the most serious crime under fire criminal law. The negligent homicide according to § 222 StGBis also suppressed. In the case of intentional homicide, Section 306c of the Criminal Code is divided into murder ( Section 211 of the Criminal Code) and manslaughter ( Section 212 of the Criminal Code).

Negligent arson, § 306d StGB

Section 306d of the Criminal Code is the relevant regulation if the perpetrator is not accused of intent, but merely negligence, at least with regard to part of the success of the crime .

(1) Anyone who acts negligently in the cases under Section 306 (1) or Section 306a (1) or negligently causes the risk in the cases under Section 306a (2) shall be punished with imprisonment of up to five years or a fine.

(2) Anyone who acts negligently in the cases of Section 306a (2) and negligently causes the risk will be punished with a prison sentence of up to three years or a fine.

The offender acts negligently if he neglects the care required when dealing with sources of fire. This applies, for example, to improperly draining gasoline, leaving smoldering remains of cigarettes on a sofa, or lighting a garbage container next to a building.

Section 306d (1) of the Criminal Code punishes, on the one hand, the negligent commission of arson. On the other hand, he punishes the negligent cause of the risk of damage to health. This is a combination of willful arson and negligent endangering of another person. Both acts are punishable by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine. This threat of punishment is reduced in accordance with Section 306d (2) StGB if the perpetrator acts negligently with regard to both the arson and the endangerment.

The structure of § 306d StGB is criticized in jurisprudence as contradicting itself : An intentional arson according to § 306 StGB is punished as a crime with at least one year imprisonment. If there is now a negligent health hazard, the scope of application of Section 306d (1) StGB is opened, which threatens a lower penalty as an offense. There is a similar inconsistency between the two paragraphs of Section 306d StGB: Paragraph 2 of which orders a lower threat of punishment than paragraph 1 for cases in which the perpetrator negligently endangers another person as a result of negligent arson. If there is no such risk, however, the perpetrator is to be punished in accordance with Section 306d (1) of the Criminal Code, which provides for a higher minimum penalty. According to the wording of the standard, the additional negligent endangerment leads to a reduction in the penalty in both cases. To resolve this contradiction, different methods have been developed in jurisprudence, which apply to different levels of Section 306d StGB.

Active repentance, § 306e StGB

Section 306e of the Criminal Code gives the offender the opportunity to obtain mitigation .

(1) In the cases under Sections 306, 306a and 306b, the court may at its discretion mitigate the penalty (Section 49 (2)) or waive the penalty under these provisions if the perpetrator voluntarily extinguishes the fire before significant damage arises.

(2) According to Section 306d, anyone who voluntarily extinguishes the fire before significant damage occurs is not punished.

(3) If the fire is extinguished without any action on the part of the perpetrator before substantial damage has occurred, his voluntary and serious endeavor is sufficient to achieve this goal.

As a rule, there is only a short time lag between the attempt and the completion of the arson. Therefore, the perpetrator has only a short period of time to withdraw from the attempt to exempt the offense from punishment . This is intended to compensate for Section 306e of the Criminal Code, which has great parallels to the general resignation provision in Section 24 of the Criminal Code. Section 306e of the Criminal Code allows the court to mitigate the sentence or even waive the punishment if the perpetrator voluntarily extinguishes the fire before it leads to considerable personal injury or property damage. This gives the perpetrator an incentive to contain the dangers associated with a fire, thereby protecting possible victims.

Although the formulation of Section 306e (1) StGB does not suggest this, the standard also applies to participants . Whether the damage that has occurred is significant is to be assessed according to the value of the object of the crime. For a residential building, the case law assumed this with damage of € 2,500. If the fire is already extinguished without any action on the part of the perpetrator, it is sufficient according to Section 306e (3) StGB if the perpetrator makes serious efforts to extinguish it.

Creation of a fire hazard, § 306f StGB

Section 306f of the Criminal Code punishes various acts that are likely to create a fire hazard. This norm was incorporated into the StGB in 1934 as Section 310a on the occasion of numerous forest fires. Essentially, it represents a specific offense at risk.

(1) Become a stranger

1. Firms or plants at risk of fire,
2. Agricultural or food industry plants or operations in which their products are located,
3. Forests, heaths or moors or
4. cultivated fields or highly flammable agricultural products that are stored in fields,

by smoking, by open fire or light, by throwing away burning or smoldering objects or in any other way in a fire hazard, is punished with imprisonment of up to three years or with a fine.

(2) Anyone who puts an item referred to in subsection (1) nos. 1 to 4 at risk of fire and thereby endangers the life or limb of another person or other people's property of significant value will be punished.

(3) Anyone who acts negligently in the cases of paragraph 1 or negligently causes the danger in the cases of paragraph 2 shall be punished with imprisonment for up to one year or with a fine.

Section 306f (1) of the Criminal Code names several objects that are typically at high risk of fire. These objects must be foreign to the perpetrator. Therefore, the consent of the property owner eliminates the criminal liability of the act. Paragraph 2 waives the requirement of strangeness, but requires in return that the act leads to a risk to life, limb or property of significant value. Paragraph 3 criminalizes negligent behavior on the part of the perpetrator, which in practice occurs more frequently than the intentional commission.

criminology

Recorded cases of arson offenses from 1987–2016.

The Federal Criminal Police Office annually publishes statistics on all criminal offenses reported in Germany, the police crime statistics . The entire federal territory has been covered since 1993. The statistics from 1991 and 1992 included the old federal states and all of Berlin. Earlier statistics only cover the old federal states.

The police crime statistics do not differentiate between the individual offenses of arson offenses. However, it differentiates between intentional and negligent inspection. Both types of inspection occur approximately equally frequently. The clearance rate for deliberate inspections is at a comparatively low level. In 2015, 35.1% of these offenses were resolved. The greatest damage in terms of value is caused by deliberate acts.

Police crime statistics for arson offenses in the Federal Republic of Germany
Cases recorded With a gun
year All in all Per 100,000 inhabitants Proportion of attempted acts

(absolute / relative)

Shot Threatened Clearance rate
1987 17,333 28.3 2,555 (14.7%) 0 9 50.4%
1988 17.007 27.8 2,615 (15.4%) 1 12 49.8%
1989 17,409 28.2 2,613 (15.0%) 0 20th 49.7%
1990 17,078 27.2 2,449 (14.3%) 0 8th 47.2%
1991 17,831 27.4 2,533 (14.2%) 0 12 47.6%
1992 18,503 28.1 2,973 (16.1%) 0 30th 45.0%
1993 23,936 29.6 3,320 (13.9%) 0 19th 46.5%
1994 22,559 27.7 3,085 (13.7%) 0 20th 48.0%
1995 22,757 27.9 2,867 (12.6%) 0 16 47.4%
1996 24,088 29.4 2,789 (11.6%) 1 23 49.0%
1997 22,281 27.2 2,585 (11.6%) 0 19th 51.4%
1998 24,338 29.7 2,595 (10.7%) 0 25th 48.7%
1999 29.003 35.4 2,526 (8.7%) 0 20th 46.6%
2000 28.002 34.1 2,424 (8.7%) 1 29 48.5%
2001 26,122 31.8 2,224 (8.5%) 1 13 47.1%
2002 25,859 31.4 2,270 (8.8%) 0 15th 49.3%
2003 30,308 36.7 2,267 (7.5%) 1 27 47.3%
2004 25,386 30.8 2,050 (8.1%) 0 20th 48.9%
2005 24,045 29.1 2,037 (8.5%) 0 16 50.0%
2006 24,349 29.5 1,880 (7.7%) 0 13 49.1%
2007 24,302 29.5 2,064 (8.5%) 0 6th 48.1%
2008 23,182 28.2 2,208 (9.5%) 0 13 48.3%
2009 22,443 27.4 2,117 (9.4%) 0 9 48.8%
2010 21,723 26.6 2,160 (9.9%) 0 6th 50.1%
2011 23.005 28.1 2,350 (10.2%) 0 7th 49.2%
2012 21,571 26.4 2,272 (10.5%) 0 9 50.2%
2013 20,069 24.9 2,231 (11.1%) 0 6th 50.5%
2014 19,298 23.9 2,219 (11.5%) 0 8th 49.8%
2015 19,251 23.7 2,116 (11.0%) 0 2 49.2%
2016 19.123 23.3 2,176 (11.4%) 0 5 47.2%

Legal situation in other states

In Austria , fire criminal law was designed as a special form of property infringement until 1974. In the course of the criminal law reform of 1974, arson was reorganized in § 169 and § 170 of the Criminal Code. Section 169 of the Criminal Code deals with willful arson, Section 170 of the Criminal Code deals with negligent. Section 169 of the Criminal Code has parallels in its structure to Sections 306–306c of the German Criminal Code, in that it provides comparable situations with an increased threat of punishment. The act of offense is causing a conflagration. This is a fire that cannot be controlled by human behavior and that harbors the risk of spreading. It is therefore not a conflagration, for example, if the perpetrator sets fire to a vehicle in the vicinity of which there are no flammable objects. In contrast to German law, this is not subject to arson, but to property damage .

The Swiss fire criminal law is in the 221 to 222 of the Criminal Code regulated. Like the Austrian Criminal Code, it deals with causing a conflagration. Compared to German and Austrian law, Swiss law contains a smaller number of qualifying facts.

literature

  • Martin Heger: §§ 306-306f . In: Kristian Kühl, Martin Heger: Criminal Code: Comment . 29th, revised edition. CH Beck, Munich 2018, ISBN 978-3-406-70029-3 .
  • Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: §§ 306-306 f. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (eds.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  • Thomas Fischer : Criminal Code with subsidiary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , §§ 306-306f .
  • Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: §§ 306-306 f. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  • Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl §§ 306-306 f. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  • Henning Radtke: §§ 306–306f . In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Hrsg.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  • Henning Radtke: The dogmatics of arson offenses. At the same time a contribution to the doctrine of criminal offenses that are dangerous to the public . Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1998, ISBN 978-3-428-09431-8 .
  • Edgar Weiler: Sections 306–306f . In: Dieter Dölling, Kai Ambos, Gunnar Duttge, Dieter Rössner (eds.): Entire criminal law: StGB - StPO - ancillary laws . 3. Edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-7129-8 .
  • Hagen Wolff: §§ 306-306f . In: Heinrich Wilhelm Laufhütte (Ed.): Leipzig Commentary on the Criminal Code . 12th edition. tape 8: §§ 306-323 . De Gruyter, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89949-564-5 .
  • Gereon Wolters: §§ 306-306f . In: Helmut Satzger, Wilhelm Schluckebier, Gunter Widmaier (Ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 3. Edition. Carl Heymanns Verlag, Cologne 2016, ISBN 978-3-452-28685-7 .

Web links

  • § 306 StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.
  • § 306a StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.
  • § 306b StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.
  • Section 306c StGB on dejure.org - legal text with information on case law and cross-references.
  • § 306d StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.
  • § 306e StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.
  • § 306f StGB on dejure.org - legal text with references to case law and cross-references.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Franz-Josef Sehr : The fire extinguishing system in Obertiefenbach from earlier times . In: Yearbook for the Limburg-Weilburg district 1994 . The district committee of the Limburg-Weilburg district, Limburg-Weilburg 1993, p. 151-153 .
  2. Christine Rex: The criminal reason for arson: a comparative study of German, Austrian, Swiss and French criminal law . Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen 2008, ISBN 978-3-86727-794-5 , p. 7-9 .
  3. Henning Radtke: Before §§ 306 ff , Rn. 1. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  4. Walter Kargl: Before §§ 306ff , Rn. 2. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  5. Walter Kargl: Before §§ 306ff , Rn. 5-11. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  6. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306 Rn. 1.
  7. Diethelm Klesczewski: The community danger as a system-defining element of arson offenses . In: Online magazine for highest judicial jurisprudence on criminal law 2014, p. 465 (466).
  8. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306 Rn. 2.
  9. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306 , Rn. 3. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  10. ^ Friedrich-Christian Schroeder: Technical errors in the new arson law . In: Goltdammer's Archive for Criminal Law 1998, p. 571.
  11. Urs Kindhäuser: Criminal Law Special Part I: Offenses against personal rights, the state and society . 6th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2014, ISBN 978-3-8487-0290-9 , § 64, marginal no. 5.
  12. ^ Rudolf Rengier: Criminal Law Special Part II: Offenses against the person and the general public . 17th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2016, ISBN 978-3-406-68815-7 , § 40, Rn. 6th
  13. Henning Radtke: § 306 , Rn. 18. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  14. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306 , Rn. 1. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (Ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  15. Hagen Wolff: § 306, Rn. 3 . In: Heinrich Wilhelm Laufhütte (Ed.): Leipzig Commentary on the Criminal Code . 12th edition. tape 8: §§ 306-323 . De Gruyter, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89949-564-5 .
  16. Martin Heger: § 306 , Rn. 1. In: Kristian Kühl, Martin Heger: Criminal Code: Comment . 29th, revised edition. CH Beck, Munich 2018, ISBN 978-3-406-70029-3 .
  17. Henning Radtke: § 306 , Rn. 8. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  18. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306 , Rn. 2. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  19. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306 , Rn. 3. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Ed.): Beckscher Online Commentary StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  20. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306 , Rn. 11. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (eds.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  21. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306 , Rn. 26.2. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  22. Claus Kreß: The arson according to § 306 StGB as damage to property that is dangerous to the public . In: Juristische Rundschau 2001, p. 315 (316).
  23. BGHSt 36, 221 .
  24. a b c BGHSt 48, 14 .
  25. a b BGHSt 16, 109 (109–111).
  26. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306 , Rn. 19. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  27. BGHSt 6, 107
  28. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306 , Rn. 15.3. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  29. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306 , Rn. 22. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  30. ^ Henning Radtke: The dogmatics of arson offenses. At the same time a contribution to the doctrine of criminal offenses that are dangerous to the public . Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1998, ISBN 978-3-428-09431-8 , pp. 207 .
  31. Klaus Geppert: The arson offenses (§§ 306 to 306f StGB) according to the Sixth Criminal Law Reform Act . In: Jura 1998, p. 597 (599).
  32. Martin Heger: § 306 , Rn. 4. In: Kristian Kühl, Martin Heger: Criminal Code: Comment . 29th, revised edition. CH Beck, Munich 2018, ISBN 978-3-406-70029-3 .
  33. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306 , Rn. 25. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  34. Kristian Kühl: Criminal Law General Part . 7th edition. Vahlen, Munich 2012, ISBN 978-3-8006-4494-0 , § 5, Rn. 43.
  35. ^ BGH, judgment of March 9, 2006, 3 StR 28/06 = Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht 2006, p. 331.
  36. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306 , Rn. 41-43. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  37. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306 , Rn. 34. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  38. Kristian Kühl: § 78a , Rn. 2. In: Kristian Kühl, Martin Heger: Criminal Code: Comment . 29th, revised edition. CH Beck, Munich 2018, ISBN 978-3-406-70029-3 .
  39. Henning Radtke: § 306 , Rn. 69. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  40. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306 , Rn. 24. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (eds.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  41. Gereon Wolters: § 306a , Rn. 1, 3. In: Helmut Satzger, Wilhelm Schluckebier, Gunter Widmaier (ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 3. Edition. Carl Heymanns Verlag, Cologne 2016, ISBN 978-3-452-28685-7 .
  42. Henning Radtke: § 306a , Rn. 2. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  43. ^ BGH, judgment of April 1, 2010, 3 StR 456/09. = New Journal for Criminal Law 2010, p. 519
  44. Henning Radtke: § 306a , Rn. 8. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  45. BGHSt 26, 121 .
  46. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306a Rn. 4a.
  47. Erik Kraatz: Arson in mixed-use buildings . In: Juristische Schulung 2012, p. 691 (692–693).
  48. BGHSt 34, 115 .
  49. BGHSt 35, 283 .
  50. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306a , Rn. 5. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (eds.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  51. Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306a , Rn. 14-15. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  52. ^ Henning Radtke: The end of the public danger? Pro Universitate, Berlin, ISBN 978-3-932490-05-7 , pp. 13 .
  53. Henning Radtke: § 306a , Rn. 2-3. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Hrsg.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  54. BGHSt 26, 121 .
  55. BGHSt 34, 115 .
  56. Gereon Wolters: § 306a , Rn. 31. In: Helmut Satzger, Wilhelm Schluckebier, Gunter Widmaier (ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 3. Edition. Carl Heymanns Verlag, Cologne 2016, ISBN 978-3-452-28685-7 .
  57. Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306a , Rn. 17. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  58. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306b marginal no. 5a.
  59. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306a Rn. 12.
  60. ^ Rudolf Rengier: Criminal Law Special Part II: Offenses against the person and the general public . 17th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2016, ISBN 978-3-406-68815-7 , § 40, Rn. 35.
  61. Edgar Weiler: § 306b , Rn. 1. In: Dieter Dölling, Kai Ambos, Gunnar Duttge, Dieter Rössner (eds.): Entire criminal law: StGB - StPO - ancillary laws . 3. Edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-7129-8 .
  62. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306b marginal no. 4th
  63. Edgar Weiler: § 306b , Rn. 3. In: Dieter Dölling, Kai Ambos, Gunnar Duttge, Dieter Rössner (eds.): Entire criminal law: StGB - StPO - subsidiary laws . 3. Edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-7129-8 .
  64. BGHSt 44, 175 .
  65. Johannes Wessels, Michael Hettinger: Criminal Law Special Part 1: Offenses against personal and community values . 40th edition. CF Müller, Heidelberg 2016, ISBN 3-8114-4262-7 , Rn. 971.
  66. Hagen Wolff: § 306b , Rn. 6. In: Heinrich Wilhelm Laufhütte (Ed.): Leipzig Commentary on the Criminal Code . 12th edition. tape 8: §§ 306-323 . De Gruyter, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89949-564-5 .
  67. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306b marginal no. 5.
  68. Edgar Weiler: § 306b , Rn. 8. In: Dieter Dölling, Kai Ambos, Gunnar Duttge, Dieter Rössner (Eds.) :. 3. Edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-7129-8 .
  69. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306b , Rn. 6. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  70. BGHSt 45, 211 (216-217).
  71. ^ Henning Radtke: The dogmatics of arson offenses. At the same time a contribution to the doctrine of criminal offenses that are dangerous to the public . Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1998, ISBN 978-3-428-09431-8 , pp. 335 .
  72. BGHSt 51, 239 .
  73. Edgar Weiler: § 306b , Rn. 9. In: Dieter Dölling, Kai Ambos, Gunnar Duttge, Dieter Rössner (eds.) :. 3. Edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-7129-8 .
  74. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306b , Rn. 9. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  75. Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg: § 306c , Rn. 9-9.1. In: Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg (Hrsg.): Beckscher Online Comment StGB , 30th Edition 2016.
  76. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306c , Rn. 5. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (eds.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  77. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306c , Rn. 4. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  78. Bernd Heinrich, Tobias Reinbacher: Objective attribution and “specific risk context” in the case of a successful offense . In: Jura 2005, p. 743 (746).
  79. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306c Rn. 4a.
  80. BGHSt 39, 322 (326).
  81. OLG Stuttgart, judgment of February 20, 2008, 4 Ws 37/08 = Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 2008, p. 1971.
  82. ^ BGH, judgment of February 4, 2010, 4 StR 394/09 . = New Journal for Criminal Law Case Law Report 2011, p. 301.
  83. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306c Rn. 7th
  84. OLG Hamm, judgment of April 7, 2017, 9 U 120/15 .
  85. ^ BGH, judgment of February 1, 2005, 1 StR 422/04 . = Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 2008, p. 1971.
  86. OLG Hamm, judgment of April 1, 2016, 9 U 232/15 .
  87. ^ Felix Herzog, Walter Kargl: § 306d , Rn. 2. In: Urs Kindhäuser, Ulfrid Neumann, Hans-Ullrich Paeffgen (eds.): Criminal Code . 4th edition. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2013, ISBN 978-3-8329-6661-4 .
  88. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306d , Rn. 1. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (Ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  89. BGH, judgment of March 15, 2000, 3 StR 597/99 . = New Journal for Criminal Law Jurisprudence Report 2000, p. 209.
  90. Thomas Fischer: Penalty framework puzzle in the 6th Criminal Law Reform Act. For the interpretation of §§ 306 ff. StGB . In: New Journal for Criminal Law 1999, p. 13 (14).
  91. Markus Immel: Problems of the negligence offenses of the new arson criminal law . In: Strafverteidiger 2001, p. 477 (481).
  92. Günter Heine, Nikolaus Bosch: § 306e , Rn. 1. In: Adolf Schönke, Horst Schröder, Albin Eser (Ed.): Criminal Code: Commentary . 29th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-65226-4 .
  93. Henning Radtke: § 306e , Rn. 1. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  94. Henning Radtke: § 306e , Rn. 8. In: Wolfgang Joecks, Klaus Miebach (Ed.): Munich Commentary on the Criminal Code . 2nd Edition. tape 5 : §§ 263–358 StGB. CH Beck, Munich 2014, ISBN 978-3-406-60290-0 .
  95. Hagen Wolff: § 306 . In: Heinrich Wilhelm Laufhütte (Ed.): Leipzig Commentary on the Criminal Code . 12th edition. tape 8: §§ 306-323 . De Gruyter, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89949-564-5 .
  96. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306e Rn. 1.
  97. Rudolf Rengier: The arson offenses according to the sixth law to reform the criminal law . In: Juristische Schulung 1998, p. 397 (400).
  98. Klaus Geppert: The arson offenses (§§ 306 to 306f StGB) according to the Sixth Criminal Law Reform Act . In: Jura 1998, p. 597 (605).
  99. Thomas Fischer : Penal Code with ancillary laws . 67th edition. CH Beck, Munich 2020, ISBN 978-3-406-73879-1 , § 306f Rn. 6th
  100. a b PKS time series 1987 to 2017. (CSV) Federal Criminal Police Office, May 8, 2018, accessed on September 27, 2018 .
  101. Police crime statistics. Federal Criminal Police Office, accessed on October 5, 2017 .
  102. Hagen Wolff: § 306 , Rn. 4. In: Heinrich Wilhelm Laufhütte (Ed.): Leipzig Commentary on the Criminal Code . 12th edition. tape 8: §§ 306-323 . De Gruyter, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89949-564-5 .
  103. Police crime statistics 2015. (PDF) Federal Ministry of the Interior, p. 101 , accessed on May 28, 2017 .
  104. Jürgen Hupfeld: Investigations into the cause of the fire - arson - intentional or negligent? In: Der Sachverstand, 2004, p. 283.
  105. Christine Rex: The criminal reason for arson: a comparative study of German, Austrian, Swiss and French criminal law . Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen 2008, ISBN 978-3-86727-794-5 , p. 41 .
  106. Christine Rex: The criminal reason for arson: a comparative study of German, Austrian, Swiss and French criminal law . Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen 2008, ISBN 978-3-86727-794-5 , p. 106-107 .
  107. Christine Rex: The criminal reason for arson: a comparative study of German, Austrian, Swiss and French criminal law . Cuvillier Verlag, Göttingen 2008, ISBN 978-3-86727-794-5 , p. 118 .
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on July 24, 2017 .