Abuse Of Trust In The Course Of Employment, Aggravated Fraud, Forgery Of Official Documents Supreme Court Decision
Summary:
The defendant, who worked as an accountant at ……………. Industrial and Commercial Ltd. Co., took the 6,500 TL given to him by the complainant to pay the company’s debts and disappeared, thereby committing the crime of breach of trust in the course of his employment. Since there is no conclusive evidence sufficient for a conviction, free from any reasonable doubt, no error is found in the acquittal.
T.C.
Court of Cassation
15th Criminal Chamber
Case No: 2013/19113
Decision No: 2015/32092
Date:
The ruling on the acquittal of the defendant for the crime of breach of trust in the course of employment, the rulings on the conviction of the defendant for the crimes of aggravated fraud and forgery of private documents by the Public Prosecutor of that place, and the appeal filed by the defendant’s counsel were reviewed, and the necessary considerations were made:
The complainant, who is the owner of ……………………… Sanayi ve Ticareti Ltd. Şti, took the 6,500 TL given to him by the complainant to pay the company’s debts and disappeared, thereby committing the crime of breach of trust in the course of employment. Since there is no conclusive evidence sufficient for a conviction, free from any reasonable doubt, no error is found in the acquittal.
In the crime of aggravated fraud, considering that the unjust benefit obtained was 5,500.00 TL, when calculating twice the benefit, a judicial fine of 275 days was imposed instead of 550 days. Since there was no appeal against the insufficient sentence, it was not considered a reason for reversal.
Regarding paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of Article 53 of the Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237, the partial annulment decision of the Constitutional Court dated 08.10.2015 and numbered E.2014/140, K.2015/85, published in the Official Gazette dated November 24, 2015, and entered into force, it was deemed possible to take it into consideration during the enforcement stage if the conditions were met.
At the end of the trial, since the court accepted and ruled that it was not established that the defendant had committed the crime of abuse of trust in the course of his duties, The appeals of the public prosecutor of that place regarding the need to issue a conviction against the defendant for the alleged crime and the appeals of the defendant’s counsel regarding the absence of the legal elements of the crimes of aggravated fraud and forgery of private documents were rejected, and the rulings were CONFIRMED as requested, with a unanimous decision on December 10, 2015.