The crime of abuse of trust (the crime of abuse of trust) can occur in the following ways::

A simple crime of abuse of trust in the form of the use of possession outside the purpose of transfer,
Abuse of trust due to service ,
Abuse of safety due to profession or art,
Abuse of trust by trade,
Abuse of safety related to deposited and delivered goods within the framework of the authority to manage someone else’s goods.

A complaint can be committed in two ways: a crime of abuse of trust, a simple and qualified state. The simple form of the offence is subject to complaint. The duration of the complaint is 6 months, starting from the date of receipt of the crime and the perpetrator. However, if the right to complain about the crime is not used within 6 months, the right to complain about the same act cannot be used again.

If the qualified cases of the crime are not among the crimes related to the complaint, there is no complaint period.

Statute of limitations; the statute of limitations for qualified cases of the crime is 15 years. If the client wishes to participate in the case, he can always use the right to complain during the statute of limitations.

The basic form of the crime of abuse of trust (TCK md.155/1) is a crime that requires reconciliation and implementation between the parties. As is known, in crimes that are subject to reconciliation, both at the stage of Investigation and prosecution, the reconciliation procedure must be applied first, and if a compromise cannot be reached, the investigation or trial must continue.

Court in charge; trials for the crime of abuse of trust are carried out by the Criminal Court of First Instance.

Nuances about the crime of abuse of trust;

-In order for the crime to occur, it is essential that the possession of the perpetrator was knowingly and willingly passed by the malik. If Malik does not have his consent in this regard, there will be no crime of abuse of trust, since no relationship of trust can be mentioned, it will be necessary to talk about different crimes according to the specific situation.

-In the crime of abuse of trust, the perpetrator must be an independent Bell. If the perpetrator is not a bell, but an assistant Bell, the crime of abuse of trust does not occur. If the owner retains de facto sovereignty over the property and can control how the property is used, or if the perpetrator uses the property under the direct supervision of the owner, there is no crime of abuse of trust.

– In the crime of abuse of trust, the perpetrator is not malik. Accordingly, those who are joint or joint owners in relation to goods that are subject to joint or joint ownership cannot be the perpetrator of this crime against each other.

– The crime of abuse of trust is different from the crime of embezzlement. The perpetrator of the embezzlement crime can only be a public official, while the perpetrator of the abuse of trust can be anyone.