T.C.
SUPREME
7. CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
E. 2014/15102 K. 2014/14597 T. 8.7.2014
Case: the decision given by The Local Court was appealed; the application’s nature, type of punishment, duration and date of crime according to the file was read and considered after the requirement was discussed:

Decision: the appeal of the Supreme Court of the Republic Attorney General’s office dated 1.5.2014 and 7-2011-152425 is seen at the site of the objection, with the acceptance of the appeal of our department dated 19.2.2014 and 2013/2164 basis – 2014/3780 decision no resolution removed from the review;

1 -) in the history of the crime, the defendant’s action is smuggling in the direction of illegal sugars as stipulated in Article 3/5 of the law No. 5607 and also in the direction of illegal fuel oil in the annex 5/1 of the law No. 5015. since it constitutes the crime regulated in the article, TCK No. 5237.nun 44. according to the article is only due to the defendant’s sugar and fuel to transport the actual most severe penalty should be punished in accordance with Law No. 5015 of deciding when two separate felony convictions in writing additional 5/1,

2 -) according to acceptance;

a -) The defendant who has been sentenced to more than three months in prison for a repeat premeditated crime shall be sentenced to 58th in the Turkish Penal Code. the decision to postpone the prison sentence, which was ruled by the opposition to the law No. 5015, despite the fact that the law does not apply and has a criminal record preventing postponement,

b -) the goods subject to lawsuit, according to the cargo of the transport vehicle in terms of quantity or volume of the whole or weighted portion of the form and the value of the illegal goods decided to confiscate the value of the transport vehicle given, confiscation No. 5237 TCK.nun 54/3. the decision to confiscate the transport vehicle instead of returning it, considering that it would be against the rights within the scope of the article,

Conclusion: contrary to the law, the appeal appeals of the accused were deemed to be in place in this regard, so that the verdict is 8/1 of the law No. 5320. CMUK No. 1412, which is in force in accordance with the article.nun 321. it was decided unanimously on 08.07.2014 that the right of the defendant to be impaired in accordance with Article 2-a in respect of the reason for the annulment should be observed in accordance with CMUK 326 /last article.