The strong claim of a criminal law guided by the principle of offensiveness is the intangible outcome of a modern rule of law. Of course, with this, referring to today's conception of criminal law as a means of protection against offensive behavior in practice for goods deemed worthy of legal protection and promotion appraisal, expunge every reference to the criminalization of mere violation of duties. In our system, the age-old debate on the Criminal Law of the offense can not disregard a constitutional perspective: in particular, the broad doctrine maintains that the Republican Constitution states, though not expressly, the general principle of the seriousness of the offense. The need for a criminal law of injury, where the use of criminal sanction is actually last resort, intended to punish only conduct offensive practice of well-defined legal property, conflicts with the proliferation of legislative initiatives, particularly in ' scope of criminal law and criminal law of the company, directed to the repression of private behavior of a concrete orientation offensive, they see the penalty call to punish breaches simple formal. The consequences of the choices of penalty should be obvious: the penalty should not take only in the presence of a complete attack on an individual situation, because the intrinsically dangerous nature of the business would be too large an area removed from the regulates criminal, with almost certain impact on the protection of the good of the individual. It outlines the need for an anticipation of the response penalties.