Autori u radu analiziraju institut osiguranja oduzimanja imovinske koristi ostvarene kaznenim djelom i prekršajem kao posebnu vrstu osiguranja privremenim mjerama na pokretninama i nekretninama. Najprije se institut prikazuje s obzirom na posebna i opća pravila kojim je uređen. Potom se analiziraju ključna obilježja uređenja. Zaključno se uspoređuju posebna i opća pravila te prikazuju temeljne razlika u uređenju instituta prema pravilima ZPOIKOKDP-a u odnosu na uređenje prema pravilima OZ-a. Apostrofiraju se: a) pravni učinci koje proizvodi upis zabrane otuđenja i opterećenja nekretnine u posebnom režimu, b) posebna pravila o oduzimanja i povjeravanje na čuvanje nekretnine, c) vrijeme za koje se privremena mjera određuje u posebnom režimu, te d) izlučni prigovor.This paper analyzes the legislative regulation of securing the confiscation of pecuniary gain acquired through a criminal offence and minor offence as a special kind of security by interim measures on real estate and movables. The latter is illustrated by means of special and general rules by which it is governed. Thereafter, the key features of its legal structure are analyzed. Finally, the authors compare both special and general rules and demonstrate the underlying differences in the regulation of this concept under the Act on Confiscation of Pecuniary Gain Acquired by a Criminal or Minor Offence in relation to the regulation under the rules of the Croatian Execution Act. Special emphasis is placed on: a) legal effects produced by the entry of the prohibition of alienation and encumbrance of real estate in the special regime; b) special rules on seizing and entrusting the real estate to care; c) the period for which the interim measure is determined under a special regime and d) objections by a third party
