Following the analysis in the present article, it is argued that the stipulation at lett.a) par.(2) from art.165 PC RM should be excluded. It’s also demonstrated that it is unacceptable that, in case of partial completion of the intention to traffic two or more persons, the qualification to be as following: par.(1) art.165 and art.27 and lett.b) par.(2) art.165 PC RM. It is showed that, the aggravating circumstance to be applied as specified at lett.c) par.(2) art.165 PC RM, the offender can even admit that the victim is a pregnant woman. Is pointed out that, in applying the responsibility under lett.d) par.(2) art.165 PC RM, is enough that, of all people taking part in the offence perpetration, at least one to comprehend signs of the offense subject. It is concluded that the legislature has reserved to the facts provided by art.327 and 328 PC RM the role of parts of a whole, which is reflected in lett.e) par.(2) art.165 PC RM. It is argued that art.151 PC RM will only apply in case when violence, applied in the context of human trafficking, is materialized as deliberate grave battery or health harm. It will not be required to retain on qualification the art.165 PC RM.