Coercion (§ 240 StGB) – Elements, Penalties and Defense

In brief: Coercion under § 240 StGB is committed by whoever unlawfully compels another person, by force or by threatening an appreciable harm, to an act, acquiescence or omission. The range runs up to three years of imprisonment or a fine. Decisive is the reprehensibility clause (§ 240(2)): coercion is only punishable where the means, in relation to the end pursued, is to be regarded as reprehensible. This is precisely where the defense begins; many proceedings can be discontinued.

The accusation of coercion arises in very different situations – in road traffic, in threats during conflicts, in blockades or in the private sphere. This article explains the elements, the sentencing range and the concrete options for action.

What is Coercion (§ 240 StGB)?

§ 240 protects freedom of decision and action. The offender must compel the victim, with one of two coercive means, to a particular conduct:

• Force: a physically effective compulsion intended to overcome an actual or expected resistance. The concept of force is disputed in borderline cases – for instance in sit-in blockades, where the case law has drawn distinctions (often decisive is whether the blockade creates a physical barrier for following vehicles).
• Threat of an appreciable harm: the announcement of a disadvantage on whose occurrence the offender purports to have influence and which is suitable to influence a level-headed person.

The attempt is punishable (§ 240(3)). In especially serious cases (§ 240(4), such as coercing a pregnant woman to terminate the pregnancy or the abuse of official powers) the penalty is six months to five years.

The Reprehensibility Clause (§ 240(2) StGB)

Unlike most offenses, coercion is not already unlawful once the elements are met. Under § 240(2), the act is only unlawful where the use of force or the threat of the harm, in relation to the end pursued, is to be regarded as reprehensible. What matters is the means-end relationship: whoever pursues a permissible aim by a socially acceptable means (for instance the announcement of a justified criminal complaint in order to enforce a claim) does not act reprehensibly. This clause is the most important starting point of the defense.

Distinction from Related Offenses

Where in addition a financial loss is sought with intent to enrich, extortion (§ 253) is present. The mere announcement of a serious crime against the victim or a person close to them, without a coercive success, may be a threat (§ 241). Where the coercion is carried out with force against a person or a threat of present danger to life or limb in order to obtain property, robbery-type extortion (§ 255) or robbery (§ 249) may apply.

Typical Cases

Very frequent is coercion in road traffic – tailgating, braking out, cutting off or persistent flashing of headlights to force another to make way. Further constellations are threats in relationship or neighborhood conflicts, forcing a signature or surrender, and blockade actions. In road-traffic cases the reprehensibility and the coercive success are usually the decisive questions.

Sentencing Range

The basic offense provides for imprisonment up to three years or a fine. Most coercion proceedings – especially in road traffic – end with a fine, a penalty order or a discontinuance. A prison sentence of up to two years can be suspended on probation (§ 56 StGB).

Course of the Proceedings

The proceedings usually begin with a criminal complaint, on which the prosecution bases the allegation. At the end of the investigation there is either a discontinuance, a penalty order or a charge before the Local Court. The earlier the defense begins, the greater the scope to steer the proceedings in a favorable direction.

Strategy and Options for Action

1. Remain Silent and Obtain File Access

Make no statement on the matter without defense counsel (§ 136 StPO). Only file inspection (§ 147 StPO) shows the evidence – witnesses, dashcam recordings, the precise course of events.

2. Deny Reprehensibility

The central approach: if the means was not reprehensible in relation to the end pursued, unlawfulness – and thus criminal liability – falls away.

3. Concept of Force and Appreciable Harm

Was there “force” in the legal sense at all, or only socially customary behavior? Was the threatened harm “appreciable” and seriously meant? Often the very elements of the offense can be called into question.

4. Causation and Coercive Success

Did the victim really change their conduct because of the coercion? If the coercive success is missing, at most an attempt comes into consideration.

5. Seek Discontinuance

For first offenders and minor consequences, a discontinuance under § 153 or § 153a StPO – often against a monetary condition – is a realistic aim. A penalty order also comes into consideration.

Consequences of a Conviction

Every conviction is entered in the Federal Central Criminal Register; it appears in the certificate of good conduct as a rule from more than 90 daily units of a fine or more than three months of imprisonment (§ 32 BZRG). In the case of coercion in road traffic, additional consequences under driving-licence law (points, in extreme cases a driving ban or withdrawal) may follow.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is tailgating already coercion?

Persistent close tailgating combined with flashing headlights can be coercion if it is intended to force another driver to make way. It depends on the duration, intensity and reprehensibility.

What does the reprehensibility clause mean?

Coercion is only unlawful where the means and the end stand in a reprehensible relationship. A socially acceptable means for a permissible aim is not punishable.

What distinguishes coercion from a threat?

A threat (§ 241) is the mere announcement of a serious crime, without a coercive success. Coercion requires that the victim is actually compelled to a particular conduct.

Can the proceedings be discontinued?

Yes, for first offenders and minor consequences a discontinuance under § 153 or § 153a StPO is frequently possible.

How We Can Help

In coercion cases, reprehensibility above all decides criminal liability. Those who remain silent early, have the evidence examined and work specifically on reprehensibility, the concept of force and discontinuance can achieve a great deal. We defend you in Bonn and throughout the Rhineland; more on our page for criminal defense in Bonn.

This article provides a general overview and does not replace advice in an individual case. A reliable assessment is only possible after inspection of the file and a personal consultation.

Written by attorney Philip Bafteh, criminal defense attorney in Bonn. Philip Bafteh publishes regularly on criminal and commercial law and defends accused persons in investigative and trial proceedings.

More about the attorney →

Last updated: July 2026