Natalia Sharina was captured in 2015 after a pursuit of her Library of Ukrainian Literature found what authorities portrayed as hostile to Russian purposeful publicity. She denied the charges.
Her capture came in the midst of pressures amongst Russia and Ukraine taking after the addition of Crimea in 2014.
Rights bunches have denounced the case.
Natalia Sharina, who is Russian, was accused of affecting contempt against Russians and furthermore of misappropriation of library assets.
A judge in a Moscow court gave her a four-year suspended sentence. She said she would offer.
The Crimea emergency
How Russia manages contradict
Talking in court, Natalia Sharina, 59, said she was stunned, and demanded that the restricted writing had been planted in the library by police.
“The state prosecutor conceded herself amid the procedures this was a political case,” she told columnists after the decision.
“An administrator is such a decent, quiet calling. You stay there, perusing books. So the way this is going on in the 21st century will most likely be recalled in decades to come – like we recollect the specialists plot and 1937,” she stated, alluding to Stalin-time open show trials.
It took the judge well more than two hours to peruse her liable decision. Each contention exhibited in the curator’s guard was rejected, including declaration by witnesses who said they saw police planting the questionable material.
The prosecutor depicted Natalia Sharina as a specialist of Ukrainian patriotism. Her legal counselor, Ivan Pavlov, called the prominent case a sham that was leaked in legislative issues.
She will now have her electronic tag evacuated, following 20 months under house capture.
In any case, the library she once ran – that was an image of Russian-Ukrainian companionship – has been disassembled. “I’m sad for the library. That what was made has been pulverized. The books have been pressed up and expelled,” she said.
Her library was shut in October 2015, and her trial begun in November 2016.
Human rights gather Amnesty International said the case “highlights genuine defects in the autonomy of Russia’s legal”.
“The arraignment has abused the profoundly charged hostile to Ukrainian air that is pervasive in Russia right now, while the court essentially expelled key confirmation for the resistance,” Amnesty’s Denis Krivosheev said in an announcement.