T.C. SUPREME COURT
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
THE CRIME OF PROVIDING BENEFITS BY USING A BANK OR CREDIT CARD WITHOUT PERMISSION – THE NEED TO MAKE A DISCOUNT ON THE DEFENDANT WHO MADE A PARTIAL PAYMENT AT THE STAGE OF INVESTIGATION – THE FACT THAT HE WAS DEEMED TO HAVE REPAIRED THE DAMAGE AT THE STAGE OF PROSECUTION AND THERE WAS A CONTRADICTION – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
ABSTRACT: TCK No. 5237 was issued about the defendant who made a partial payment at the investigation stage.nun 168/1. while a discount should be made in accordance with the article, it is accepted that it fixes the damage at the stage of prosecution and the application clause is TCK.nun 168/1. causing a contradiction in the provision by showing it as an article and paragraph and giving a discount of 1/2 required the provision to be broken.
(5271 Pp. K. m. 231) (5320 P. K. m. 8) (5237 p. K. m. 53, 168) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 T. E. 2014/140 2015/85 K.)
Case and Decision: Discussed and considered as required:
CMK of the decision to withdraw the disclosure of the decision made in advance about the defendant who has not had a final conviction as of the date of the crime.nun 231/5. according to the scope of the file, the defendant has not eliminated all of the damage caused to the victim, therefore CMK.in accordance with Article 231/6-c of the law, it is understood that there is no possibility to apply the withdrawal of the disclosure of the provision about the defendant; ”since the defendant had previously decided to withdraw the disclosure of the verdict for a deliberate crime,” the decision that there was no room for the disclosure of the verdict by betting was not considered effective in the conclusion, the thought of overturning No. 2 in the communiqué was not involved and the reason for overturning was not made.
According to the trial, the contents of the file, the evidence collected and shown at the place of decision and evaluated, the belief and discretion of the court formed as a result of the investigation, the acceptance and application of the crime in accordance with the formation and nature, the defendant’s other appeals that are not considered on the spot, according to the justification explained as lawful, legal and sufficient, but;
1- It is understood that the defendant made a partial payment at the stage of investigation and prosecution, the victim abandoned his complaint at the stage of investigation due to a partial payment, and declared that he had consent to the implementation of the provisions of effective remorse; TCK No. 5237 about the defendant who made a partial payment at the stage of investigation.nun 168/1. while a discount should be made in accordance with the article, it is accepted that it fixes the damage at the stage of prosecution and the application clause is TCK.nun 168/1. causing a contradiction in the provision by showing it as an article and paragraph and giving a discount of 1/2,
2- In accordance with the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 24.11.2015 and published in the Official Gazette No. 29542 dated 08.10.2015 and based on 2014/140, annulment No. 2015/85 decision of the TCK entered into force on the date of 08.10.2015.nun 53. there is an obligation to re-evaluate the article,
Conclusion: Contrary to the law, since the defendant’s appeals have been considered in place as of this date, the judgment is for these reasons 8/1 of the Law No. 5320. CMUK No. 1412, which must be implemented in accordance with its article.nun 321. according to the article, the BREAKDOWN was decided, unanimously, on 30.06.2016 day.