After studying the criminal case, the court must choose a fair sanction commensurate with the deed. Moreover, he must take into account mitigating circumstances. Art. 61 of the Criminal Code fixes a list of factors that may affect the size and type of sanction. The list presented in the norm is considered open. Let's consider in more detail Art. 61 of the Criminal Code with comments lawyers. 
List of circumstances
According to part 1 of article 61 of the Criminal Code, the size and type of sanction may be affected by the following factors:
- the commission of a moderate or minor severity of an act for the first time in a random combination of circumstances;
- age up to 18 years;
- pregnancy;
- the guilty presence of young dependents;
- commission of an offense in connection with a difficult set of circumstances or out of a feeling of compassion;
- physical / mental coercion to crime or material, official or other dependence;
- commission of an act in violation of the limits of justified risk, emergency, necessary defense, conditions for the detention of a citizen who committed an unlawful act, and the execution of an order / order;
- illegality / immorality of the victim's behavior that provoked the crime;
- surrender, active actions that contribute to the investigation, disclosure of the act, the exposure and prosecution of accomplices, the search for values obtained by criminal means;
- medical assistance to the victim immediately after the infringement, voluntary compensation for moral and material damage arising from the crime, other actions indicating the desire to make amends for the damage caused to the victim.
Nuances
When imposing a sanction, the court has the right to take into account those not specified in the first part Art. 61 of the Criminal Code mitigating circumstances. This provision is enshrined in part 2 of the article in question.
If applied Art. 61 CC mitigating circumstance provided for by the relevant norm of the Special Part, it cannot be re-taken into account when imposing a sanction on the perpetrator. This position secures part 3 of the analyzed article. 
Commentary on Art. 61 of the Criminal Code
The list of factors presented in part 1 of the norm allows the court to choose the most fair sanction within the limits of the penalties established in the Criminal Code (in the Special Part). As a rule, its size is less than the maximum allowable limit.
Cited in Art. 61 of the Criminal Code (as amended)) the list is open. This circumstance is of particular practical importance. The court may at its discretion take into account any other factor mitigating the sanction. At the same time, the court’s verdict should indicate not only this circumstance, but also the reasons why it is recognized by the court as extenuating.
First act
AT Art. 61 of the Criminal Code mandatory signs of this circumstance are given. For the first time, a committed act must be of moderate or minor gravity and be caused by a coincidence.
The person who committed the infringement for the first time should be considered a citizen guilty of unlawful acts (one or several) for which he was not convicted or the sentence did not enter into force.
The same category includes subjects who previously committed crimes for which the statute of limitations for:
- prosecution (article 78 of the Criminal Code);
- enforcement of sentence (83 Codex norms).
For the first time, the person who has been convicted of in connection with the act of amnesty, pardon or on general grounds is also recognized as having committed the act.
Characteristic features
The features of classifying an assault as a minor offense are disclosed in Article 15 of the Criminal Code.
The coincidence of circumstances is determined in each case individually. A crime, for example, can be committed under the influence of an adult who has taken advantage of naivety, inexperience of a person, in connection with a sharp change in weather, which caused a violation of traffic rules, etc.
It is worth saying that the very fact of the commission of the act for the first time without the signs provided for in paragraph a) of the first part Art. 61 of the Criminal Codeis not a mitigating factor. This is due to the fact that the absence of a criminal record is considered the norm, and not the merit of a person.
Juvenile responsibility
In the proceedings, the court must take into account that the consciousness of minors is in its infancy. Often a teenager is not able to objectively and responsibly evaluate what is happening. Moreover, minors are influenced by adults involved in the crime and exhibiting aggression. 
Given this, the legislator includes in the list of mitigating factors enshrined in Art. 61 of the Criminal Codeminority guilty.
Pregnancy
By listing Art. 61 of the Criminal Code This circumstance, the legislator proceeded primarily from the principle of humanism. Pregnancy can negatively affect the mental state of a woman: irritability increases; quick temper, etc. These factors must be taken into account by the court when choosing a sanction.
Presence of young dependents
This circumstance requires careful study and evaluation. For example, the presence of a child in a guilty person will not be regarded as a mitigating factor if the assault was committed against this juvenile, including one who is adopted or ward. The court should take a similar position in the case when the accused is deprived of parental rights.
Failure to recognize this circumstance as extenuating should be motivated in the relevant part of the sentence.
Item d
Severe circumstances can be considered, for example, the lack of funds for the purchase of products in case of loss of work, a serious illness of the guilty person or his loved one, etc. These factors push the citizen to illegal actions.
The motive of compassion occurs when a seriously ill patient is given, at his request, a lethal dose of a medicine. Under current law, euthanasia is prohibited in the Russian Federation.
Mental / physical coercion or addiction
These circumstances will be considered mitigating if the court establishes their real existence, and the actions of the perpetrator, in turn, will be recognized as compelled. In such situations, the will of the citizen is suppressed by the unlawful actions of another person.
Responsibility will come when the subject could resist pressure, but for one reason or another did not. 
When applying Art. 61 of the Criminal Code it should be noted that the subject cannot be held liable if his illegal actions are caused by extreme necessity. For example, you cannot punish a cashier at a bank that transferred money to an attacker, threatening to use weapons, or grave consequences, including the loss of life.
P. "g" h. 1 61 of the Criminal Code
The circumstances cited in this paragraph have a number of specific features. Compliance with the lawfulness of the detention of the offender, the necessary defense, justified risk, emergency, execution of the order / order excludes the criminality of actions. Accordingly, the person who committed them cannot be charged at all.
At the same time, the circumstances cited in paragraph "g" may be included in the disposition of the relevant norm of the Special Part. For example, article 108 provides for sanctions for murder involving the excess of measures necessary to carry out the detention of a criminal, or the limits of permissible (necessary) defense; norm 114 - for inflicting severe or moderate damage to health in case of violation of the conditions for the use of necessary defense.When considering such cases, the provision of clause 3 of Art. 61.
Victim behavior
The immoral or unlawful actions of the victim of a crime can cause a state of passion in the perpetrator. For example, severe excitement often arises as a result of violence, bullying, grave insult.
When considering crimes, the court must analyze the nature of the wrongfulness / immorality of the victim's behavior. For example, if a minor steals apples from a child’s mischief from the garden, then such actions cannot act as a mitigating circumstance in relation to a citizen who caused serious harm to the health of the child. 
Confession Turnout
It is recognized as a mitigating factor when a citizen in any form (verbal, written) reported a crime committed by him or with his participation, to the body authorized to carry out criminal prosecution. Often, a citizen claims an assault even before anyone else knows about it.
For the application of Art. 61 the message form does not matter. The main thing is that it should be sent specifically to law enforcement or other authorized bodies. It is worth considering that the statement made guilty after being detained on suspicion of a crime does not exclude the possibility of being recognized as a circumstance mitigating the sanction.
For example, a citizen has been hiding from prosecution for a long time, but subsequently voluntarily comes to law enforcement agencies. In some cases, the perpetrator claims other acts unknown to the authorized structures.
If the investigating authorities already had information about the crime (they received information from the victim, witness, etc.), and the detainee knew about it, the confirmation by the guilty of the fact of participation in the assault is not regarded as a confession. It can be recognized as another extenuating circumstance (for example, as the exposure of accomplices). 
Investigation assistance
It is expressed in providing the perpetrators with information unknown to the investigating authorities. For example, a citizen indicates the location of the instrument of crime, assists in organizing and carrying out an investigative experiment, accounting expertise, transfers material evidence, etc.
An active contribution to the disclosure of the deed is considered to be the exposure of partners, assistance in finding values obtained illegally.
For all these actions to be recognized as extenuating circumstances, they must be performed by a person voluntarily without any pressure.
Additionally
In criminal law, such a thing as active repentance is used. It involves the active actions of the perpetrator, aimed at minimizing or eliminating the damage caused by the crime. 
This can be immediate medical assistance to the victim, voluntary compensation for moral and property damage, and so on. All these actions indicate a lesser degree of danger to the identity of the perpetrator for society.