A crime can be committed as one person, so two or more: then we are talking about complicity. What is it like? This term refers to the joint participation of people in the commission of an intentional crime. And along with the performer, the instigator, organizer and accomplice are recognized as accomplices. 
Responsibility of accomplices in the crime of excess executor
The responsibility of the accomplices of the crime before the law depends on the degree and nature of the actual participation of each person in the commission of the offense, while their actions are qualified in accordance with their functional role in it. A considerable steering wheel is also played by personality traits. That is, if they directly affect the degree of public danger, then they are charged with other participants in the crime along with the performer. When attributing them solely to the identity of one of the accomplices, the remaining persons are not responsible for them.
When sentencing, the motives and goals of the crime are also taken into account, provided that the accomplices were aware of them, but not necessarily shared. If the act was not completed for any reason, the accomplices will still be liable for attempted crime or preparation for it. 
Criminality
Criminal law has a definition of “implication in a crime,” which differs from complicity, but has similar features. So, the actions of a person in this case may not have a causal connection with the actions of the accomplices, but there is any involvement in them. An example of implications is:
- non-reporting (non-reporting or passive behavior);
- connivance (inaction);
- harboring;
- acquisition or sale of property obtained by criminal means.
And complicity in a crime must certainly have a causal connection with the actions of other persons attempting an unlawful act. 
Excess
The excess of the perpetrator of a crime is the commission of an act contrary to law, regardless of the intent of the other partners. In this case, the remaining persons are responsible only for those acts that they intended to commit, and the performer is separately responsible for the excess that has occurred.
The excess of the perpetrator of the crime and its criminal law significance
Kurtosis is a crime that is committed by the performer on his own initiative and is not dependent on other accomplices. It is possible with any form of complicity, which is provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The performer in this case independently goes beyond the scope of the act, which was previously agreed upon with other participants, committing a different kind of crime.
The excess of the perpetrator of the crime implies a mismatch between the outcome of the crime and the actions of the accomplices. The subjective connection between them becomes lost, as the performer changes the content of intent.
A common sign of all cases of excess is the unplanned actions of the performer for accomplices in the crime.
Consider the following case. The instigator, while instructing the performer to commit the theft of the apartment, suggested that if the owners were found in the apartment, he would kill, but at the same time admitted the commission of this crime.And since in this situation the accomplice had an assumption of certain actions of the executor, there is no talk of an excess here as such, even if the commission of the crime was not included in the plans of other participants. In this case, this will be considered an indirect intent, and when sentencing will be qualified in accordance with this fact.
If the instigator would not have foreseen in any way the indicated act of the performer, then it would be possible to speak of an excess.
Types of excess
In criminal law, certain types of excess of the executor are divided, depending on the direction in which the action evaded the general plan. There are quantitative and qualitative excesses. In addition, an excess can be singled out separately when the perpetrator commits a double crime: conceived by all accomplices and that which he decided to commit on his own initiative.
Quantitative excess
Consider the excess of the perpetrator of the crime. An example here is the situation where the instigator inclines the performer to theft, and he commits the robbery. These crimes, in fact, are homogeneous, but they have different degrees of danger.
The instigator in this case is responsible for preparing for the theft, since he was engaged in attempting to commit this crime, but due to circumstances beyond his control, namely from unforeseen actions of the performer, another criminal act was committed, for which the person who will committed it.
That is, in this case a more dangerous act was committed, since robbery is already a two-object crime directed against the person and property, while theft is a one-object crime.
Quality excess
In the case of a quality excess, a heterogeneous crime is committed, completely contrary to what was planned by the accomplices or the organizer. Here the criminal encroaches on a completely different object. Suppose that the instigator ordered the performer to kill a certain person, in response to this, the performer, having climbed into the apartment of the potential victim and not finding him there, commits theft.
The intention to commit the theft arose regardless of the desires and actions of the instigator. In this case, the instigator will be responsible for preparing for the murder, and the perpetrator for this item, as well as for the theft committed.
In practice, it often happens that an excess accompanies the execution of a crime. In our example, the act that was originally planned was not committed, for reasons beyond the control of the performer, but an excess occurred. If, in the considered example, the perpetrator nevertheless committed the murder, and in addition to theft, he would be responsible for two crimes, and the instigator - for complicity in the crime (murder).
Causality
Partners are released from punishment for the perpetrator committed an act for the following reasons:
- the absence of a causal link between the activities of the participants and the criminal result that led to the actions of the contractor
- lack of intentional guilt as a result of the activity of two or more persons.
In an excess, the liability of other partners is limited only to acts committed within the framework of the criminal agreement. Partners can only be responsible for those actions that they foresaw and for which they agreed. In this case, the perpetrator encroaches on another object or commits the wrong crimes to which he was incited.
Release of partners from punishment for the excess of the performer
Partners in the event of an excess of the performer are not subject to criminal liability for the crime committed by him.Previously, they were equally responsible for the commission of an unlawful act, but it was established that the crime committed by the performer on his own initiative cannot be blamed on other participants, that is, he alone should be responsible for the act committed by him.
Partners, therefore, are responsible for the joint commission of a crime of which they were all aware. In the case of an executor’s excess, the remaining participants cannot foresee the circumstances of a new crime that they did not plan, and do not contribute to an unlawful act.
