{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019335855401429174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0025220680958385876, 'mean_word_length': 5.4324324324324325, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
MISDEMEANOR: NEW CHALLENGES OF DEFINITION INTERPRETATION

This article is dedicated to the issue of misdemeanor term content and the scope determination, and its differentiation from a crime. This issue arises from the use in the Criminal Code of Ukraine of the regulatory construction �the other punishment not related to the liberty deprivation� when defining the term of a misdemeanor. Such legislative definition can have double interpretation: either as other, more lenient than liberty deprivation for a particular period, types of punishment or as other types of punishment, but for those, that according to their content, also mean liberty deprivation (isolation from society) � imprisonment, confinement in disciplinary military unit, liberty deprivation for a particular period, or life sentence. Purpose. The purpose of this article is not to question language or technical and legislative means used for the formulation of the misdemeanor definition, but a significant law-application issue the solution of which will directly affect criminal-material and procedural consequences connected with reference of a criminal offense to the category of a misdemeanor or minor offense. Results. This article gives reasons why the regulatory construction �crimes not related to the liberty deprivation� should be interpreted as other types of punishment but for imprisonment, confinement in disciplinary military unit, liberty deprivation for a particular period, or life sentence. Another approach, which is to interpret the corresponding regulatory provision as any type of punishment different to liberty deprivation for a particular period or life sentence, is rather a forced one, but not well-grounded. Conclusion. There are enough of scientific and regulatory grounds for understanding of the used in part 2 article 12 of the CC of Ukraine definition �punishment not related to the liberty deprivation� as the corresponding list of punishment types listed in part 1 article 51 of the CC of Ukraine, but for the punishment in the way of imprisonment, confinement in disciplinary military unit, liberty deprivation for a particular period, or life sentence. Arguing that the corresponding definition should be interpreted as any type of punishment other than liberty deprivation for a particular period and life sentence is rather a forced position but not well-grounded.