The department demands from them in solidarity 453 million rubles. As a result of the actions of the defendants of the case, according to the investigation, more than one billion rubles were allocated for the construction of military facilities. Protection of entrepreneurs claims that the facilities were built without violations of the law, and the damage was caused not to the Ministry of Defense, but to businessmen who "completed their military facilities with their own money".

Five people were involved as civil defendants in the suit of the Ministry of Defense - two former deputy director of the Special Construction (abolished Federal Agency for Special Construction) Alexander Zagorulko and Alexander Buryakov, as well as entrepreneurs Kadyr Karakhanov, Vakha Artsygov and Arsen Oshakbaev. In equal parts, the military department jointly intends to recover from them more than 453 million rubles.

It should be noted that in the criminal case, the amount is twice as large as the damage: according to the investigation version, businessmen, having conspired with the ex-leaders of Spetsstroi, stole more than one billion rubles. According to the materials of the case, the fraud was carried out as follows: entrepreneurs, having accepted the proposed by them officials from Spetsstroi, the conditions for concluding contracts in which the corruption component was perceived, then overestimated the estimated cost of building the facilities. The resulting difference in spending, they were transferred to the accounts of related firms, cashed and abducted.

So, according to the case materials, the repair of the military campus "Chernyshevsky barracks" on Bolshaya Serpukhovskaya street in Moscow, the estimated cost of work at the facility was increased from 400 million to 825 million rubles. In the same way, according to the investigation, the money was stolen during the construction of a military town in the Kubinka suburb near Moscow and an object of military intelligence on the island of Iturup.

It should be noted that the former leaders of Spetsstroy Zagorulko and Buryakov admitted their guilt, telling investigators that they received kickbacks as "live" money, and expensive cars. The generals of the Spetsstroi concluded pre-trial cooperation agreements with the Prosecutor General's Office, their cases were separated into a separate proceeding, and they themselves were transferred from the pre-trial detention center for house arrest. At the same time, businessmen were charged with giving bribes from businessmen, since the investigation concluded that they paid kickbacks not on their own initiative, but forcedly - under threat of termination of contracts.

Protection of entrepreneurs believes that the data of the examination of the construction and repair of objects assigned by the investigation diverge from the actual volume of work performed on them.

At the same time, lawyers say, investigators deliberately deny lawyers an independent examination. "The materials of the case state that there are no doors and windows in the barracks, not even a fence around them, although all this is present!" - lawyer Vladimir Starinsky told Kommersant. According to him, to conduct the examination, investigators attracted a certain private firm, whose specialists, working on commercial terms, gave out the data that the customer needed. "We demanded expert examination by specialists who are attracted by the Ministry of Justice, rightly believing that only they, which are not commercially motivated, can give an objective assessment, but we were denied these applications," complained Mr. Starinsky.

Representatives of the defense are confident that in the event of an objective trial it may turn out that the Ministry of Defense owes it to entrepreneurs, and not vice versa. "On the island of Iturup, the company Karakhanova, using, by the way, not budgetary, and its own funds, performed work for hundreds of millions of rubles, and the customer refused to accept them, which was the reason for the investigation," said lawyer Starinsky. In his opinion, the fact that the Ministry of Defense suffered damage suffered in the amount of half the amount that appears in the materials of the criminal case testifies to the biased nature of the investigation.