T.C. SUPREME COURT
2.Criminal Department
Base: 2015/1595
Decision: 2018/164
Date of Decision: 23.01.2018
THEFT CRIME – STEALING CHEDDAR CHEESE AND CHOCOLATE WORTH THIRTY-SIX TL SEVENTY-FIVE CENTS – THE VALUE OF THE GOODS CONSTITUTING THE SUBJECT OF THEFT IS LOW – THE NEED TO MAKE A DISCOUNT AT A RATE TO BE DETERMINED FROM THE PUNISHMENT GIVEN
ABSTRACT: In the event that the defendant attempted to steal cheddar cheese and chocolate worth TL 36.75 from the grocery store he entered as a customer, according to the valuation minutes, although the punishment cannot be stopped due to the way and characteristics of the crime, the punishment given should be reduced to a certain extent due to the fact that the value of the goods that constitute the subject of theft is low.
(5237 Pp. K. m. 3, 61, 141, 145) (5271 P. K. m. 231) (YCGK. 15.12.2009 T. 2009/6-242 E. 2009/291 K.)
The file was examined and considered as necessary;
According to the contents of the file, other appeals were not considered to be in place.But;
1- article 145 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 5237. article 522/1 of the Law No. 765 on the concept of ”low value of goods”. in the article the criteria and slight very slight similarity, except that it gives a discount from the punishment of both substances in the absence of a “lack of value” Law No. 5237-specific, separate, and it is a new concept, the nature of the incident, the defendant’s personality and spent a showing of intent to evaluate and legal and sufficient reasons, by considering a concrete case that can be applied by; according to the valuation report, the defendant attempted to steal cheddar cheese and chocolate worth TL 36.75 from the grocery store he entered as a customer; TCK No. 5237 145. failure to observe that it is necessary to discuss whether to apply the article,
2- When it is decided that there is no place for the defendant to withdraw the disclosure of the provision, CMK’s 231. the objective (lens) is evaluated and the reasons for this and subjective conditions that should be shown to the defendant of the judgment in the criminal records back to back to release the announcement of their decision to release the announcement of the award does not constitute an obstacle to the implementation of the provisions of the same law 231/6-C are shown, and the announcement of the award to be turned back to the objective (lens) is one of the conditions with the crime victim or the public of the damage the exactly return, by completely eliminating the damage that will prevail in making a crime before or compensation, to be determined by a simple study of material damage is convincing, concrete remaining in the attempted stage of the theft in a case of a simple research can identify with the nature of the crime and the judge due to the absence of any material harm, to be turned back to the announcement of the award sought to be decided CMK 231. article 6. taking into account that the objective (objective) conditions shown in paragraphs a and c of paragraph a have been met; 231 of the CMK about the accused. article 6. Paragraph (B) in clause stated, “Considering the attitudes and behaviors of the trial with the defendant’s personality traits to reach conclusions about whether he would commit a crime again” nominative (subjective) evaluated according to the results of the quantification of the condition, while defining the legal status of the defendant “the defendant was previously a record of the announcement of the award to be turned back because it is related to” format, and not enough about the legal justification accused turned back to the announcement of the award giving to decide if it’s the place to be,
Since the appeals of the accused were considered in place as of this moment, it was decided unanimously on 23.01.2018 that the verdict should be OVERTURNED as requested for these reasons.
You can reach our other articles and petition examples from clicking here.
