SUPREME COURT 11. Criminal Department, Base: 2013/11074 , Decision: 2013/8061

02/05/2013 day and PUK organized by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Supreme Court of the Ministry of Justice on 15/04/2013 days and 2013/5880/24325 days in reference to the request to overturn for the benefit of law No. 02/05/2013 of the General Directorate of Criminal Affairs of the Ministry of Justice.with the notification dated 2013/140291;

Defendants accused of violating the payment requirement … regarding their acquittal as a result of the trial held against them …5. the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 13/12/2011 and numbered 2011/1522, based on 2011/1813 on the adoption of the appeal filed by the complainant’s deputy and the abolition of the decision referred to …1. Following the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 19/03/2012 and Amended Business number 2012/178, 340 of the Law on Enforcement and Bankruptcy of the defendants No. 2004. in accordance with Article 5 of the Criminal Code, they are sentenced to up to 3 months of hard labor imprisonment. Regarding the rejection of the appeal filed by the defendant … his deputy against the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 10/07/2012 and based on 2012/418, No. 2012/1183 …1. In the examination of the file covering the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 01/10/2012 and numbered 2012/511;

1- Regarding the accused …5. In the review of the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 10/07/2012 and based on 2012/418, dated 2012/1183;

Conducted on debtor defendants …13. In the follow-up file No. 2010/24758 of the Enforcement Directorate, in the commitment minutes of 20/01/2011 containing the payment commitment of the defendants; as the collection fee required to be paid by the borrower is not shown, “the interest debt that will be processed according to the payment dates is the balance of the rights related to the surplus.”considering the text in the form of “, it is understood that the obligation of the defendants is legally invalid in the face of the fact that there is uncertainty in the obligation to pay, the total amount of debt payable for these reasons has not been calculated and clearly shown together with all fer’i, but the defendant’s commitment has not been hit in deciding on his conviction in writing instead of acquittal.

2- Regarding the accused M…1. In the review of the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 01/10/2012 and numbered 2012/511 Different Works;

Conducted on debtor defendants …13. In the follow-up file No. 2010/24758 of the Enforcement Directorate, in the commitment minutes of 20/01/2011 containing the payment commitment of the defendants; as the collection fee required to be paid by the borrower is not shown, “the interest debt that will be processed according to the payment dates is the balance of the rights related to the surplus.” form given in the text where ambiguity exists committing to the payment of the amount of total liabilities payable due to these reasons it has not been shown clearly calculated with the defendants, since all the individual types of commitment that is legally invalid, but instead of the acceptance of the objection, in writing, has not been seen hitting the denial should be in deciding whether to bet code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 309. in accordance with the article, the aforementioned decision was requested to be overturned, but the file sent to our Department was examined and discussed as necessary:

…13. In the follow-up file of the Enforcement Directorate No. 2010/24758 Dated 20.01.2011, the collection fee that the borrower must pay is not clearly indicated, but the interest that will be processed according to the payment dates is not calculated, and the rights to the surplus are reserved, although the total amount of the debt is not clearly displayed and is legally invalid due to uncertainty in the payment commitment;

Mercii …1. According to the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 19.03.2012 and numbered 2012/178; It was decided to accept the appeal and 271/2 of the Criminal Procedure Code numbered 5271. according to its article, the authority that considers the objection in its place must also make a decision on the subject of the appeal. For this reason, since the transactions and decisions made later are in the no provision, it was unanimously decided on 16.05.2013 that the file should be transferred to the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Court for sending to the Ministry of Justice for the discretion and execution of the need to go to the way of overturning the law on the specified issue.