[1] Chairman of the board of the regional public fund "Defense of the Fatherland", providing assistance to the veterans of special forces and security agencies combating terrorism.

In 1999, Brykin was transferred from the post of first deputy head of the Federal Tax Service (FSNP) for the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous District, to Moscow.

In 2004 Brykin was appointed the head of the Economic Tax Crime Bureau of the Far Eastern Federal District and moved to the Far East.

In 2014, Brykin received an offer from the leadership of the Regional Public Fund of Assistance to Veterans of the Special Forces and the Security Agencies Combating Terrorism "Defense of the Fatherland".

[6] Sanctioned by Canada under the Special Economic Measures Act (S.C. 1992, c. 17) in relation to the Russian invasion of Ukraine for Grave Breach of International Peace and Security.

[8] Married, has a son and daughter, grandchildren[5] Soon after his retirement from the law enforcement, Nikolai Brykin became the founder of the "Southern Breeze" LLC (TIN 2302055962), registered on October 12, 2007, in Krasnodar Krai.

[9] According to the official list of activities, the company works in the real estate, construction, and other related business fields, including railway communication.

The registration documents of the company specify 81 various activities, including grape farming, construction, woodworking, retail and wholesale trade of the various goods, etc.

According to the information available in the media, Nikolai Brykin, with the help of his son-in-law Sergei Kiryanov, tried to capture a share in a company owned by the businessman and the opposition member Konstantin Dyulgerov.

According to one of the theories available in the media, the true reason for Brykin's dismissal was his personal interest in one of the high-profile cases of large-scale fraud.

[17] Brykin, being the general director of Russian Fuel Company (OJSC Rostopprom), by virtue of the position held, directly participated in its bankruptcy.

His actions as the general director of OJSC Rostopprom, as well as the surety documents signed by him, ultimately led to the bankruptcy of a previously successful state-owned company.

[24] In accordance with the court decision,[25] the stance of the Central Bank was recognized as lawful and justified, and the claims of Yugra were not a subject to satisfaction.