GENERAL PART
SECTION II. CRIME
CHAPTER 8. CIRCUMSTANCES EXCLUDING CRIMINALITY OF ACT
Article 36. Necessary Defense
(1) Infliction of harm to a trespasser as necessary defense, i.e. in protecting a person, the dwelling, property, land holdings and other rights of the defender or other persons, legal interests of society and the State against socially dangerous trespassings shall not be recognized as crime unless with excess of bounds of necessary defense.
(2) Any person is entitled to necessary defense regardless of opportunity to avoid trespassing or request help from other persons or authorities.
(3) Excess of necessary defense limits is a flagrant inconsistence between the defense and the nature and danger of trespassing. Doing harm to a person attempting on human life, health or property or while repelling other attempts combined with the use or a threat to use arms, shall not be deemed as excess of necessary defense limits. Infliction of harm on a trespasser through carelessness shall not lead to criminal liability.
1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct:
(c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph;