This paper addresses the contemporary issue of interpreting and applying paragraph four of article 167 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in relation to the withdrawal of assets on behalf of the state through the mechanism of unilaterally imposed restitution. The practice of “unilateral restitution” has become fairly common in cases brought by the prosecutor. This issue is explored through the lens of a particular case, which demonstrates the successful implementation of “unilateral restitution” as a sanction for the contractor’s reliance on municipal authorities. The article further examines the procedural aspects, which persistently arise in each and every case.