Abuse Of Security Due To Service Corruption
T.C. YARGITAY 11th Criminal Chamber Main : 2002/13866, Decision : 2004/797, Date : 01.01.2004
At the end of the trials of the defendants Yüksel Kurt and Ahmet Çelikten for the offense of abuse of security due to service: At the end of the trials of the defendants Yüksel Kurt and Ahmet Çelikten, the verdict of the 10th Criminal Court of First Instance of ANKARA dated 19.07. 2002 dated 19.07.2002 and numbered 2001/1386 Main, 2002/948 Decision was requested by the defendant and the defendant’s attorney to be examined by the Court of Cassation within the period of time and the case documents were sent to the department with the notification of the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office dated 28.10.2002 requesting reversal and the necessity was examined and discussed:
Since there is no conclusive evidence that the car worth 6.500.000 liras was sold to the defendant by the complainant, who is the owner of the gallery, by taking a deposit of 50 US Dollars, there is no inconsistency in the court’s acceptance and appreciation that the act of the defendant, who bought the car to use it for 15 days, constitutes the crime of abuse of trust, and therefore, the reversal opinion in the notification regarding the nature of the crime has not been joined.
The collected evidence has been examined in the decision, the offense of the defendant Yüksel Kurt has been accepted, his qualification has been determined in accordance with the occurrence and investigation results, the nature and degree of the reason increasing the punishment has been appreciated, his defense has been rejected with convincing reasons, and there is no error in the verdict given according to the examined file, so the defendant’s defense counsel’s objections that the right to defense was restricted by not accepting the excuse, that the crime did not occur in terms of its elements, that there was incomplete investigation, and that Articles 4-6 of the Law No. 647 should be applied are rejected. Articles 4-6 of the Law No. 647 should be applied and the objections of the appeals that are not deemed appropriate are rejected and the verdict is APPROVED,
As for the appeal of the defendant Ahmet Çelikten:
Considering that no complaint was made against the defendant within the legal period, continuing the public case filed for the offense of abuse of trust, the prosecution of which is subject to complaint, and establishing a conviction verdict in writing,
It was decided unanimously on the day of 16.02.2004 that the verdict be reversed in accordance with Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since it is contrary to the law and the defendant’s appellate objections have been deemed appropriate in this respect.