10 Jul Forgery In The Price Part Of The Deed
T.C. Supreme Court 11. Criminal division E. 2013/755, K. 2015/22745, T. 23.02.2015
* Prosecution of the deed that the lawyer knows has been falsified ( falsification in the official document – the defendant does not know that falsification has been done on the deed subject to the crime argued/falsification of the person who is alleged to have made a change and can not be seen as sincere statements other than evidence can not be obtained )
* Increase the price by forgery in the price part of the deed ( the Attorney’s claim that he committed the crime of forgery in the official document by putting the deed in pursuit knowing that the falsification was done-the defendant does not know that the falsification was done on the deed subject to the crime argued / falsification of the person )
* Falsification of the official document (the claim that the lawyer committed the crime of falsification of the official document by putting the deed in pursuit knowing that the falsification was done – the defendant does not know that falsification was done on the deed subject to the crime argued / falsification of the person who is alleged to have )
5237 / m. 204
Summary: The defendant, who is a lawyer, has been sued by his client for falsifying the deed and committing the crime of falsification of the official document by putting it into execution knowing that the price was increased. The defendant argued that at stages he did not know that the deed subject to the crime had been falsified. Except for the abstract statement of his client which is not seen as sincere and changing in stages, it is necessary to decide his acquittal by taking into account that sufficient definite, concrete and unsuspecting evidence cannot be obtained for the conviction of the defendant.
Case: file examined and considered necessary:
Verdict : 1-A. of the defendant, who is a lawyer. Y. as acting creditor A. Y. the victim of the debtor, A. He. 2800 TL value of the bond A. Y. in the public lawsuit filed by the defendant claiming to have committed the crime of falsification in the official document by falsifying the price part and putting it into execution knowing that the price was increased to TL 12.800, the defendant argued that he did not know that falsification was done on the deed subject to the crime at stages, A. Y.in addition to the abstract statement, which is not seen as sincere and changing in stages, the conviction of the defendant is decided on insufficient grounds instead of acquittal without considering that sufficient definite, concrete and free from any doubt evidence can not be obtained.,
2-according to the acceptance; TCK No. 5237, which is the legal result of the conviction of imprisonment for intentional crime.nun 53. Article 1. failure to rule on the deprivation of Rights written in the paragraph,
Conclusion: contrary to the law, the appeal appeals of the accused have been deemed in place in this regard, so the provision is for these reasons 8/1 of the law No. 5320. article 1412 should be applied in accordance with the CMUK no.nun 321. its dissolution under the clause was decided by unanimous decision on 23.02.2015.
No Comments