Criminal Matter No. 1-12-700

COURT JUDGEMENT IN THE NAME OF THE REPUBLIC OF

Court Court, Liivalaia Courthouse Date and place of making 25 January 2012 in the court judgement

Judge Aime Ivanson

Clerk Maire Viksi Prosecutor Elle-Mai Velling Interpreter Anneli Helmann

Criminal defence counsels Raivo Bergson (Elvo Timm’s defence counsel) Toomas Pilt ( Tursmann’s defence counsel) Ain Alvin (Esta Viidakas’ defence counsel) Mare Sepp (Tiit Heinloo’s defence counsel) Andres Simson (Esta Kase’s defence counsel)

Accused ELVO TIMM, Personal Identification Code 36309030318, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx and xxxx Place of work member of management board

SIGNE HEIN, Personal Identification Code 46112270355, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work member of management board of OÜM

KAIDO ESNA, Personal Identification Code 36303240231, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work taxi-driver

VLADISLAV BELOKAPÕTOV, Personal identification Code 36906114214, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work taxi-driver

KALEV TURSMAN, Personal Identification Code 35902280281, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work taxi-driver

ESTA VIIDAKAS, Personal Identification Code 46307120221, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work AS S, accountant

JEVGENI PCHELINTSEV, Personal Identification Code 36912070366, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work OÜ T, product manager

TIIT HEINLOO, Personal Identification Code 36110150215, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work taxi-driver

DONAT SMIRNOV, Personal Identification Code 37309020261, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work automotive electrician

SIGNE EELRAND, Personal Identification Code 46205120296, not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work SV

ESTA KASK, Personal Identification Code 46004280304 not punished pursuant to criminal procedure, Residence xxx Place of work SV

Type of procedure Settlement proceedings Number of criminal matter 04230101169

CONCLUSION To convict ELVO TIMM pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 5 (five) years. To convict ELVO TIMM pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 4 (four) years and 3 (three) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 5 years of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, to determine that 3 months and 20 days of imprisonment from the imposed punishment shall be borne immediately and the imprisonment of 4 years 8 months and 10 days shall not be enforced if Elvo Timm does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 5 years.

Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody in the term of punishment, i.e. to deem the time from 11 May to 31 August 2010, i.e. 3 months and 20 days during which time Elvo Timm was held in custody during preliminary investigation to be served.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Elvo Timm.

To convict SIGNE HEIN pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish her with imprisonment of 4 (four) years. To convict SIGNE HEIN pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish her with imprisonment of 5 (five) years. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 5 years of imprisonment.

Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, to determine that 6 months of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months shall not be enforced if Signe Hein does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 5 years.

Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody in the term of punishment, i.e. to deem the time from 6 October 2006 to 5 April 2007, i.e. 6 months during which time Signe Hein was held in custody during preliminary investigation to be served.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Signe Hein.

To return Signe Hein two Nokia mobile phones, apartment keys and cash 3000 EEK, which were confiscated upon searching Signe Hein’s home, upon entry into force of the court judgement.

Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to release from seizure Signe Hein’s assets seized by the Harju County Court ruling of 24 October 2006: 1) immovable property at xxx, Tallinn, with area of 600 m2 and 2) immovable property at xxx, Tallinn, with area of 929 m2.

To convict KAIDO ESNA pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict KAIDO ESNA pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months of imprisonment.

Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, to determine that 1 year and 8 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 2 years 5 months and 22 days shall not be enforced if Kaido Esna does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months.

Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include in the term of punishment served the time spent in provisional custody from 28 June to 30 June 2006, i.e. 3 days, and from 5 October 2006 to 9 October 2007, i.e. 1 year and 5 days, in total 1 year and 8 days spent in provisional custody.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate EEK 14 503 and € 120 (cash EEK 3818 found and confiscated upon the search of xxx in the bar on 5th October 2006 and cash € 120 and EEK 10 685 found and confiscated upon the search of xxx in the bar on 28th June 2006).

To return Kaido Esna cash EEK 1765 and two mobile phones, which were confiscated upon detaining him as a suspect on 5th October 2006, upon entry into force of the court judgement.

To convict VASSILI BELOKAPÕTOV pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict VASSILI BELOKAPÕTOV pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months of imprisonment.

Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, to determine that 1 year and 8 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 2 years 5 months and 22 days shall not be enforced if Vassili Belokapõtov does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months.

Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include in the term of punishment served the time spent in provisional custody from 12 September to 14 September 2006, i.e. 3 days, and from 5 October 2006 to 9 October 2007, i.e. 1 year and 5 days, in total 1 year and 8 days spent in provisional custody.

Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to release from seizure Vassili Belokapõtov’s assets seized by the Harju County Court ruling of 21 September 2006: 1) immovable property with register part number xxx at xxx, Tallinn.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate from Vassili Belokapõtov cash EEK 1575 confiscated upon detaining him as a suspect on 5th October 2006.

To convict KALEV TURSMAN pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict KALEV TURSMAN pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 10 (ten) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 10 (ten) months of imprisonment.

Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, to determine that 4 months and 3 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 3 years 5 months and 27 days shall not be enforced if Kalev Tursman does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months.

Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody in the term of punishment served, i.e. to deem the time from 5 October 2006 to 7 February 2007, i.e. 4 months and 3 days during which time Kalev Tursman was held in custody during preliminary investigation to be served.

To return Kalev Tursman the personal effects which were confiscated upon the search of Xxx bar on 5th October 2006: wallet together with money contained in it – EEK 3000 and EUR 860 – upon entry into force of the court judgement.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Kalev Tursman.

To convict ESTA VIIDAKAS pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish her with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 5 (five) months. To convict ESTA VIIDAKAS pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish her with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 5 (five) months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Esta Viidakas does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 5 months.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate cash EEK 1600 found upon the search of Xxx office.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Esta Viidakas.

To convict EVGENY PCHELINTSEV pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict EVGENY PCHELINTSEV pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 6 (six) months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Evgeny Pchelintsev does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 5 October 2006 to 4 April 2007, i.e. 6 months in the term of punishment served.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate cash EEK 6161 and € 20 found upon the search of Xxx bar.

To return Evgeny Pchelintsev NOKIA 7370 phone, which was confiscated as physical evidence, upon entry into force of the court judgement.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Evgeny Pchelintsev.

To convict TIIT HEINLOO pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict TIIT HEINLOO pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 8 (eight) months. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 8 (eight) months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Tiit Heinloo does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 8 months.

To convict DONAT SMIRONOV pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years. To convict DONAT SMIRONOV pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code and punish him with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and 1 (one) month. Pursuant to § 64 (1) of the Penal Code, to consider a lesser punishment to be imposed by imposition of the most onerous one and impose as aggregate punishment 3 (three) years and 1 (one) month of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Donat Smironov does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 1 month.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Donat Smironov.

To convict SIGNE EELRAND pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code (§ 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code) and punish her with imprisonment of 2 (two) years and 6 (six) months. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Signe Eelrand does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 28 June to 30 June 2006, i.e. 3 days in the term of punishment which has been served.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Signe Eelrand.

To convict ESTA KASK pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code (§ 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code) and punish her with imprisonment of 2 (two) years and 6 (six) months. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Esta Kask does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 5 September to 7 September 2006, i.e. 3 days in the term of punishment which has been served.

To annul the preventive measure – prohibition on departure from the residence – upon entry into force of the court judgement with respect to Esta Kask.

Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to release from seizure Esta Kask’s assets seized by the Harju County Court ruling of 13 September 2006: - immovable property with register part number xxx at xxx, Tallinn; - immovable property with register part number xxx at xxx, Tallinn.

Expenses relating to criminal proceedings: To order Elvo Timm to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel in pre- trial proceedings – EUR 38.35

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Elvo Timm to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the amount of EUR 763.35 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 63.61 every month.

To order Signe Hein to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Signe Hein to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 60.42 every month.

To order Kaido Esna to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 57.53

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Kaido Esna to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the total amount of EUR 782.53 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 65.21 every month.

To order Vladislav Belokapõtov to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 92.82

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Vladislav Belokapõtov to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the total amount of EUR 817.82 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 68.15every month.

To order Kalev Tursman to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Kalev Tursman to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 60.42 every month.

To order Esta Viidakas to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 95.02

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Esta Viidakas to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the amount of EUR 820.02 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 68.34 every month.

To order Evgeny Pchelintsev to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 81.45

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Evgeny Pchelintsev to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the amount of EUR 806.45 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 67.20 every month.

To order Tiit Heinloo to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Tiit Heinloo to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 60.42 every month.

To order Donat Smirnov to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 2.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 725

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Donat Smirnov to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 60.42 every month.

To order Signe Eelrand to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 1.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 435 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 40.72

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Signe Eelrand to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the amount of EUR 475.72 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 39.64 every month.

To order Esta Kask to pay into public revenues: 1) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 9) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, compensation levies 1.5 times the amount of the minimum monthly wage – EUR 435 2) Pursuant to § 175 (1) 4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, remuneration for the counsel – EUR 40.72

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order Signe Eelrand to pay the expenses relating to criminal proceedings in the amount of EUR 475.72 in instalments within 12 months, to pay EUR 39.64 every month.

The expenses relating to criminal proceedings have to be paid to the Ministry of Finance bank account No. 10220034800017 in SEB or bank account No. 221023778606 in Swedbank, reference number 2800049777. Number of the criminal matter – 1-12-700 – and text “expenses relating to criminal proceedings” has to be written on the payment order. The first payment of expenses relating to criminal proceedings has to be paid within one month after the entry into force of the court judgement. (The court judgement enters into force, if no appeal is filed, on 2nd February 2012).

Pursuant to § 180 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order that the expenses incurred in the making of copies of the materials of the criminal file for counsels shall be borne by the state.

Procedure for appeal An appeal may be filed against the judgement in the case of a violation of the provisions of Division 2 of Chapter 9 or subsection 339 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused and the counsel may also file an appeal against a judgment made in settlement proceedings in the case the act described in the settlement is not a criminal offence, the legal assessment thereof according to the Penal Code is incorrect or if a punishment which is not prescribed by law is imposed on the accused. The Harju County Court shall be notified in writing of a wish to exercise the right of appeal within seven days as of the pronunciation of the judgment. An appeal against a court judgment shall be filed in writing with the court which made the judgment within 15 (fifteen) days as of the date when the party to the court proceeding had the opportunity to examine the judgment in court.

CHARGES

Thus, Elvo Timm, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Elvo Timm, being a member of a criminal organisation aided prostitution, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 17 September 1996 until 31 August 2008, the wording of § 2022 (2) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Signe Hein, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

With such activities Signe Hein aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Kaido Esna, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Kaido Esna aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Vladislav Belokapõtov, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Vladislav Belokapõtov aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Kalev Tursman, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Kalev Tursman aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Esta Viidakas, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Esta Viidakas aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Evgeny Pchelintsev, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Evgeny Pchelintsev aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Tiit Heinloo, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Tiit Heinloo aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Donat Smirnov, being a member of a permanent organisation consisting of three or more persons who share a distribution of tasks, created for the purpose of proprietary gain and whose activities are directed at the commission of criminal offences in the second degree, committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code.

Thus, Donat Smirnov aided prostitution as a member of a criminal organisation, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Signe Eelrand aided prostitution, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

Thus, Esta Kask aided prostitution, i.e. committed a criminal offence which is legally assessed pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code (from 1 August 1997 until 31 August 2002, the wording of § 2026 (3) 3) of the Penal Code was effective; from 1 September 2002 until 15 July 2006, the wording of § 268 (1) of the Penal Code was effective; since 16 July 2006, the wording of § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code is effective).

SETTLEMENTS Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Elvo Timm and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 5 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 4 years and 3 months, aggregate punishment 5 years of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, 3 months and 20 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 4 years 8 months and 10 days shall shall not be enforced if Elvo Timm does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 5 years. The imprisonment subject to immediate enforcement is deemed to be served due to the time spent in provisional custody during preliminary investigation.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Signe Hein and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 4 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 5 years, aggregate punishment 5 years of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, 6 months of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months shall not be enforced if Signe Hein does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 5 years. The imprisonment subject to immediate enforcement is deemed to be served due to the time spent in provisional custody during preliminary investigation.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Kaido Esna and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months, aggregate punishment 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, 1 year and 8 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 2 years 5 and 22 days shall not be enforced if Kaido Esna does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months. The imprisonment subject to immediate enforcement is deemed to be served due to the time spent in provisional custody during preliminary investigation.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate EEK 14 503 and € 120. Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to return Kaido Esna cash EEK 1765 which was confiscated upon detaining him as a suspect on 5th October 2006.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Vladislav Belokapõtov and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months, aggregate punishment 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, 1 year and 8 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 2 years 5 and 22 days shall not be enforced if Vladislav Belokapõtov does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months. The imprisonment subject to immediate enforcement is deemed to be served due to the time spent in provisional custody during preliminary investigation. Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to release from seizure Vassili Belokapõtov’s assets seized by the Harju County Court ruling of 21 September 2006 – immovable property with register part number 8515801 at xxx, Tallinn (Vol. I, file page 234).

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate from Vassili Belokapõtov cash EEK 1575 confiscated upon detaining him as a suspect on 5th October 2006.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Kalev Tursman and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 10 months, aggregate punishment 3 years and 10 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (2) and (3) of the Penal Code, 4 months and 3 days of imprisonment shall be enforced immediately and the imprisonment of 5 years 5 months and 27days shall not be enforced if Kalev Tursman does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months. The imprisonment subject to immediate enforcement is deemed to be served due to the time spent in provisional custody during preliminary investigation. Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to return Kalev Tursman the personal effects which were confiscated upon the search of Xxx bar on 5th October 2006: wallet together with money contained in it – EEK 3000 and EUR 860.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Esta Viidakas and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years and 5 months, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years, aggregate punishment 3 years and 5 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Esta Viidakas does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 5 months. Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate cash EEK 1600 found upon the search of Xxx office.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Jevgeni Pchelintsev and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months, aggregate punishment 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Jevgeni Pchelintsev does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 6 months. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 5 October 2006 to 4 April 2007, i.e. 6 months in the term of punishment served.

Pursuant to § 832 of the Penal Code, to confiscate cash EEK 6161 and € 20 found upon the search of Xxx bar. Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to return Evgeny Pchelintsev NOKIA 7370 phone, which was confiscated as physical evidence.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Tiit Heinloo and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 8 months, aggregate punishment 3 years and 8 months of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Tiit Heinloo does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 8 months.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Donat Smirnov and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 255 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 3 years, pursuant to § 2681 (2) 1) of the Penal Code the imprisonment of 3 years and 1 month, aggregate punishment 3 years and 1 month of imprisonment. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Donat Smirnov does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years and 1 month.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Signe Eelrand and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Signe Eelrand does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 28 June to 30 June 2006, i.e. 3 days in the term of punishment served.

Pursuant to the settlement concluded between the prosecutor, Esta Kask and the defence counsel, the punishment of the accused pursuant to § 268 (1) of the Penal Code is the imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months. Pursuant to § 73 (1) and (3) of the Penal Code, the imposed punishment shall not be enforced if Esta Kask does not commit a new intentional criminal offence within the period of probation of 3 years. Pursuant to § 68 (1) of the Penal Code, to include the time spent in provisional custody from 5 September to 7 September 2006, i.e. 3 days in the term of punishment served. Upon entry into force of the court judgement, to release from seizure Esta Kask’s assets which were seized.

The court takes guidance from the provisions of § 248 (1) 5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judge