247 of the Turkish Penal Code, which is a general provision. In response to the embezzlement crime mentioned in the article, The Banking Law No. 5411 has introduced special regulations concerning the embezzlement crime involving the chairman and members of the board of Directors of the bank and other members.

160/1 of the Banking Law No. 5411 published in the official gazette dated 01.11.2005. Substance;

“The chairman and members of the board of directors and other members of the bank who embezzled the money or documents or other goods which are replaced by money or other goods which he or she is obliged to protect and supervise because of his or her duty shall be punished with imprisonment of six to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days, ”

One of the values that constitutes the subject of crime is money. In Addition, 198 Of The New Turkish Penal Code No. 5237.in substance, issued by the state and also the bearer bonds, stocks, bonds and coupons, issued by the competent authorities which is legally and circulate securities, bonds, and gold jewellery is in lieu of national money with paperwork. The concept of “other goods” in the article refers to all kinds of goods with economic value. 247 of the new Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 on the crime of embezzlement, although it is thought that only movable property can constitute the subject of embezzlement and immovable property cannot constitute the subject of embezzlement.in the reason of the article, it is accepted that” the subject of embezzlement is movable or immovable property ” and that embezzlement can also occur in terms of immovable property. Although there is no clarity in the Banking Law No. 5411, an embezzlement charge can be mentioned for a member of the bank who is authorized to sell, rent and make other savings on a real estate owned by the bank.

Article 22/3 of the Law No. 4389 states that the money or property embezzled by the bank employee must belong to the bank in order to be charged with embezzlement. Therefore, when the evaluation is made in terms of the period in which the relevant law is in force, the bank is present with the 3.there will be no mention of embezzlement in respect of property belonging to persons.

In the Banking Law No. 5411, which came into force after the 4389 numbered law, there is no requirement that the value embezzled belongs to the bank. Therefore, if the money embezzled by the bank employee belongs to the bank or belongs to third parties, if legal elements are formed, an embezzlement offence occurs. The important thing is to find the crime subject before the bank.

B.K md 160/2

“If the crime is committed with fraudulent acts aimed at ensuring that the embezzlement is not exposed, the perpetrator shall be sentenced to imprisonment not less than twelve years and a judicial fine up to twenty thousand days; however, the amount of the criminal fine shall not be less than three times the damage suffered by the bank. In addition, in case of non-payment of damages, the court shall have to pay the damages.”he is called.

There is a qualified case of embezzlement if the crime is committed with fraudulent acts aimed at ensuring that the embezzlement is not exposed. It is imperative that fraudulent conduct is conducive to ensuring that the crime of embezzlement does not occur. Because, if a fraudulent act has been committed, but this behavior has no deceptive nature, and if the crime can be detected at first glance, then it is not possible to mention the existence of a qualified embezzlement crime. This is the practice of the Supreme Court. That is to say;

“With the signature determined by the expert report that the tediye receipt no. 845 Bimref no. 981672 does not belong to the complainant, the applied signature of the depositor in the bank records can be understood by the bank officials at first glance whether it is understood that the Depositor’s signature at first glance does not belong to the Depositor, the betle action, it is against the law to rule in writing as a result of incomplete investigation without investigation.’’

In the case of criminal sanctions, the defendant in the case of simple embezzlement is imprisonment from six to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days. In case of high-quality embezzlement, the defendant shall be sentenced to imprisonment not less than twelve years and a judicial fine of up to twenty thousand days. On the other hand, the amount of the judicial fine cannot be less than three times the damage suffered by the bank.

“Effective remorse” in the banking law is not regulated under a separate title as in the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, and is related to the crime of embezzlement 160.Articles 4 and 5. it’s in his jokes.

Accordingly, if the person who has committed the act informs the competent authorities of the situation and returns the embezzlement value in the same way or fully compensates for the damage suffered, the penalty will be reduced by two thirds before the investigation begins for the crime of embezzlement. It does not matter whether the payment is voluntary or by whom it is made.

If the effective remorse has occurred only after the beginning of the investigation but before the public trial has been opened, the penalty will be reduced by half, and if it has occurred after the public trial but before the provision of the sentence, it will be reduced by one third. However, payments made at this stage must be voluntary. For this reason, for example, if the damages are compensated through forced execution, there is no opportunity to benefit from effective remorse provisions.

Supreme Court 5.The following decisions of the Penal Office also state that extradition is sufficient to benefit from effective remorse provisions:

“Considering that the payment of the original embezzlement amount except interest is sufficient for the application of the extradition provisions, the defendants who are understood to have paid in proportion to the principal amount are determined by the exact payment dates and are entitled to the Turkish Penal Code 202/3. it is against the law not to apply the clause.’’

Also, B.K.m.162 in order to start the investigation and prosecution of crimes committed in accordance with this law, the rule requires that the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency or the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund apply in writing to the public prosecutor’s Office. The investigation cannot be launched without this condition.