YTCK period, the Supreme Court decision in cases where more than one with a verb that may be in question occurs as a result of accepting the idea ictimain by the verb should be understood only in the sequel, not the only move you agree that, in practice, the generally accepted ideas of the teaching that have been adopted in the natural sense of movement every bodily action that is performed if you are creating a separate legal being one with the desired point to be expressed in a sense of the movement, even if it has more than one transaction in the natural sense of this movement, it is accepted as the only act by forming a union in the evaluation for legal reasons. In intellectual case law, the fact that the verb or movement is unique means the uniqueness in the LEGAL sense, not in the natural sense, and the case law has been made in the form of. 43 OF TCK(criminal code). Article 2. and 44. processing of a verb with more than one crime in the articles mentioned the uniqueness of the verb-verb, although we could have used the title of multiplicity, here the verb is the act of purpose, and the uniqueness of this title of motion-Motion need to be understood in the form of plurality. Excluding a chained criminal relationship
one needs to be an assembly to be able to discuss the relationship of movement and a real sense of movement would not be primarily a meeting with more than one job since ictimain regarding the uniqueness of the movement which is the most important starting point and a real sense of what should be understood from the concept at this point, it considers only cases where the addition of oneness to move outside of the state must be disclosed.