The article attempts to examine the problems of qualification of administrative offences related to corruption, in particular violation of restrictions on combining and concurrently governing the imposition of administrative sanctions under article 172-4 СAO. Differentiated legal approaches to the definition of alignment and a second position, control and composition of the Board, Executive or Supervisory bodies, the Supervisory Council of an enterprise or organization. In particular, this article focuses attention on the conflict of laws aspects of legislation, regulatory requirements concerning the incompatibility of functions of state authorities and local self-government and membership of the Board, revealed a problem of lack of harmonization of the list of certain types of permitted activities for certain categories of officials, which creates ambiguity in law enforcement. Given the number of decisions on Affairs about attraction to administrative responsibility under part 2 of article 172-4 of the CAO, that is, the membership of the Board, other Executive or controlling bodies, or Supervisory Council of an enterprise or organization that has the objective of making a profit, based on the analysis which the author identified signs that may indicate the presence or absence of corpus delicti under article 172-4CAO. Also the article presents the categorization of the most common mistakes in law enforcement practice in the consideration of administrative cases on violation of restrictions on combining and overlapping with other activities.