Article 66 — Guilt in Case of Notional Concurrence Resulting in,

Crimes With Various Material Consequences. (1) When a given crime implying an injury to persons or property, or the use or arms, instruments or dangerous means, fire or explosives, poison or toxic substances, entails an injury whereby the elements constituting a second crime have materialized, whether it be bodily injury, injury to health, death of a human being or the destruction of another person's property, the Court shall apply the following principles for determining the. guilt and the penalty: (a) if the result achieved was intended or foreseen and accepted by the criminal (Art. 58(1)). When he committed the first crime, he shall be punished for both the first crime and the resulting crime and aggravation shall apply in accordance with the relevant provisions (Arts.184 and l87 (2)(a)), due regard being had to the combination of the elements constituting the two intentional crimes; (b) if an intentional crime results in a crime committed by negligence (Art. 59(1)) there shall be concurrence between the intentional act and the resulting crime due to negligence, and the Court shall increase the penalty accordingly (Art. 187(2)(a)); (c) if the first crime committed by negligence results in another crime punishable for negligence there shall be concurrence between the crimes committed by negligence and the Court shall aggravate the penalty accordingly (Art. 187(2)(b)). (2) Aggravation shall apply in particular where criminal result was achieved by means endangering public safety, such as arson, explosion, use of explosives or where communication or public health are in danger as well as in the case of exposure persons, maltreatment, brawl, abortion, rape sexual outrages (Arts. 187(2)(c) and 184).