T.C SUPREME COURT
14.Criminal Division
Main: 2015/ 6298
Verdict: 2018 / 7135
Decision Date: 03.12.2018

The provisions of the court of first instance were appealed and considered necessary by examining the file:

In the examination of the sentence established against the defendant for violation of housing immunity;

After the provision 5237 No. 53 of the TCK. as for the article dated 24.11.2015, published in the Official Gazette No. 29542 and entered into force 08.10.2015 day of the Constitutional Court and 2014/140 basis, 2015/85 decision no.

The prosecution and defense with evidence; since the trial has been analyzed and appreciated, and has been advised and exercised in accordance with the elements of the act that was considered subutu, the defendant has been upheld by rejecting appeals that are not seen in place,

As for the appeal review of the sentence established against the defendant for simple sexual assault;

Made to judge, together with the court’s decision in accordance with the opinion of the evidence and the results of investigations and prosecutions at the discretion examined based on the content of the file place the poet appeals that are not seen in denial of Appeal,

But;

Kayden was born 20.10.1995 and was sixteen years old at the time of the crime, the defendant, who was a neighbor when the victim was in the house on the day of the incident, entered the house without consent and tried to hug and kiss the victim, as can be seen from all the contents of the file, considering that the action remains at the level of groping, and after the provision, law 6545, which entered into force on 28.06.2014, the amendment to crimes against sexual immunity, taking the evil eye, decided on the conviction of the child for simple sexual abuse by groping, specified in sentence 103/1.2 of the TCK, instead of making a decision on the determination of the quality of the crime, fell into error 102/1 of the TCK. convicted of simple sexual assault,

After the provision 24.11.2015 day, 29542 published in the Official Gazette and entered into force 08.10.2015 day of the Constitutional Court and 2014/140 basis, 2015/85 decision no.5237 TCK 53. since a partial cancellation decision has been made in terms of the article, it is necessary to re-evaluate the mentioned issue by taking the evil eye,

Contrary to the law, since the appeals of the accused are considered in place in this respect, the right acquired in the amount of the penalty is reserved, Provided that the provision is 8/1 of law 5320. article 321 and 326 of Cmuk 1412. it was decided by unanimous decision on 03.12.2018.