Pies Yury Alekseyevich

Pies Yury Alekseyevich

Biography

2021: 8.5 years in prison for fraud

On April 1, 2021, the Preobrazhensky Court of Moscow sentenced Yuri Pirogov to 8.5 years in prison. The former president of Mast-Bank was found guilty of embezzlement (part 4 of article 160 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and fraud on an especially large scale (part 4 of article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Pirogov's accomplices - the former vice-president of Mast Bank Elena Zhuravleva and the ex-head of the credit department Natalya Zhelobaeva - received 6.5 years and 5 years and 10 months in prison, respectively, while serving their sentences in a general regime correctional colony. At the same time, Zhelobaeva was released from punishment in connection with his departure to the pre-trial detention center.

According to TASS, prosecutors asked to appoint Pirogov 11 years in prison, Zhuravleva - 7.5 years in prison, Zhelobaeva - 6.5 years. Pirogov's lawyer called the term requested by the state prosecution "prohibitive." The defense insisted that he was not involved in embezzlement. The rest of the defendants also did not admit their guilt in the incriminated acts.

According to investigators, in 2013-2015, Pirogov, together with former vice president of the bank Elena Zhuravleva and head of the credit department Natalya Zhelobaeva, as well as ex-chairman of the board of Mast-Bank Alexander Chemetov and unidentified accomplices, using their official position, issued loans to organizations under their control in the amount of more than 5.6 billion rubles. In the future, this money was stolen.

In addition, Pirogov in 2015 deceived the heads of Viktrade LLC and Priority LLC and stole money from the accounts of these companies, not fulfilling the obligation to transfer promissory notes totaling about 112 million rubles.

Earlier, the Preobrazhensky District Court of Moscow, having considered the case in a special order - without examining the evidence, since Chemetov fully admitted his guilt, sentenced him to 4.5 years in a general regime colony.^[1]

2023: Recovery of 5.6 billion rubles in the case of embezzlement of money

The Tushinsky District Court of the city Moscow recovered 5.6 MAST-bank billion from ex-employees "" rubles in the case of embezzlement of money from a credit institution. This was announced on September 4, 2023 by the press service of the bankruptcy trustee of the bank -. Deposit Insurance Agencies (DIA)

It is clarified that the decision was made on August 25, 2023. The money was collected from the president of the bank Yuri Pirogov, vice-president Elena Zhuravleva and the head of the credit department Natalia Zhelobaeva. Earlier they were convicted of theft of MAST-Bank property.

The court recovered 5.6 billion rubles from ex-employees of MAST-Bank in the case of embezzlement of money

According to the Investigative Committee of Russia, in 2013-2015, Yuri Pirogov, together with the acting chairman of the board of Mast Bank, Alexander Chemetov, as well as Elena Zhuravleva, Natalia Zhelobaeva and other unidentified persons, using his official position, acting as an organized group, out of selfish interest, in order to waste the bank's funds on an especially large scale, they issued loans to organizations under their control in the amount of more than 5.6 billion rubles. In the future, the examination appointed by the court established damage of 5.8 billion rubles. The funds were stolen.

In addition, Pirogov in 2015, using his official position as president of the bank, by deceiving the heads of Viktrade LLC and Priority LLC, committed theft of funds from the accounts of these organizations on an especially large scale by default on the transfer of promissory notes totaling about 112 million rubles.

Earlier, the former acting chairman of the board of KB Mast-Bank, Alexander Chemetov, was already convicted of embezzlement for 4.5 years in prison.

The Bank of Russia revoked the license from Mast-Bank in June 2015 due to the credit institution's failure to comply with federal laws governing banking activities. Thus, the bank did not fulfill its obligations to depositors, significantly inaccurate reporting was provided to the Central Bank, and the bank itself was involved in conducting dubious operations to withdraw funds abroad in a large volume, as well as dubious transit operations.^[2]

Notes