The excess of necessary defense shall entail criminal liability only in cases specifically prescribed in Articles 118 and 124 of this Code. 4. A person shall not be subject to criminal liability where that person was not able, due to high excitement, to evaluate if the harm caused by that person was proportionate to the danger of the trespass or circumstances of defense. 5. The use of weapons or other means or things for protection against an attack of an armed person or an attack of a group of persons, and also to avert an unlawful violent intrusion upon a dwelling place or other premises, shall not be treated as the excess of necessary defense and shall not entail criminal liability irrespective of the gravity of harm caused to the trespasser. Article 37. Misread Defense 1. The misread defense shall mean actions resulting in a harm caused in the absence of any real socially dangerous trespass where the person, who misinterpreted actions of the victim's, only mistakenly presumed the reality of such trespass. 2. The misread defense shall exclude any criminal liability for the harm caused only if the circumstances involved furnished reasonable grounds for the person to believe that there was a real trespass and that person was not and could not be aware that his/her presumption was mistaken. 3. Where a person was not and could not be aware that his/her presumption was mistaken, but acted in excess of defense justifiable under the circumstances of a real trespass, that person shall be criminally liable for the excess of necessary defense. 4. Where a person, under the circumstances, was not aware of, but ought to realize the absence of a real socially dangerous trespass, that person shall be criminally liable for the harm caused by recklessness. Article 38. Apprehension of an offender 1. Any actions of the victim or other persons immediately following a trespass and aimed at the apprehending of the offender and bringing him or her to appropriate public authorities and were not in excess of what was necessary for such apprehension, is not held to be criminal. 2. Any willful infliction, upon an offender, of grievous harm clearly disproportionate to the danger of the trespass or circumstances involved in the apprehension of the offender, is held to be in excess of measures necessary for the apprehension. The excess of measures necessary for the apprehension of an offender shall entail criminal liability only in cases specifically provided for in Articles 118 and 124 of this Code. Article 39. Extreme necessity 1. Infliction of harm to legally protected interests in circumstances of extreme necessity, that is to prevent an imminent danger to a person or legally protected rights of that person or other persons, and also public interests or interests of the state, shall not be a criminal offense, where the danger could not be prevented by other means and where the limits of extreme necessity were not exceeded. 2. Any willful infliction of harm upon any legally protected interests, where such harm is larger than the harm thus prevented, is held to be in excess of extreme necessity.