Supreme Court Of The Republic Of Turkey

7.Criminal Division
Basis: 2016/10029
Decision: 2016/8897
Decision Date: 23.06.2016

CRIME OF SMUGGLING – THE SEARCH OF THE VEHICLE STOPPED AT ROAD CONTROL WITHOUT BANDROLES AND CONTRABAND CIGARETTES WERE SEIZED – THE LACK OF A GOVERNMENT FACILITY WITH INCOMPLETE INSPECTION – THE NEED FOR A VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION

Summary: in the history of you stopped in control of the way the event is made …’S led and …’S cardboard and is located next to smuggled cigarettes were seized during a search of the vehicle, which bandrolsuz 1.720, the accused …’s thrown on the stage during capture the scene in the defense of absence and the fault does not accept …’s had provided the vehicle for this purpose clothes and stuff to move a car he wants, smuggled cigarettes has nothing to do with stated, gave expression partially observed that although the defense of the other defendants in the correct orientation, 2014/24646 based on 2015/18567 decision no. 2013/230 based on 2013/279 Decision No.of the Criminal Court of First Instance brought the file and the examination of the file and the statements contained in this file should be determined and determined as a result of the determination and determination of the legal status of the accused.

(4733 P. K. m. 8)

Case: the verdict given by The Local Court was appealed; after reading the file according to the nature of the application, type of punishment, duration and date of crime, the requirement was discussed and considered on behalf of the Turkish nation;

Verdict: I-participating … administration in review of attorney’s appeal;

8/4 of Law No. 4733, amended by law No. 5752 of the action laid on the defendants according to the date of the crime and the nature of the seized goods. 8/1 of law 5320 of the request for appeal of the Treasury deputy on behalf of the customs authority, since the Customs Authority, which is not directly damaged by the crime, does not have the right to participate in the case and appeal the provision. 317 of Cmuk No. 1412 in force in accordance with article. refusal in accordance with the article,

II-The defendant … in the examination according to the appeal of his defense;

Made in the history of the event is in control of the way you stopped …’s led and …’S cardboard and is located next to smuggled cigarettes were seized during a search of the vehicle, which bandrolsuz 1.720, the accused …’s thrown on the stage during capture the scene in the defense of absence and the fault does not accept …’s had provided the vehicle for this purpose clothes and stuff to move a car he wants, smuggled cigarettes has nothing to do with stated, gave expression partially observed that although the defense of the other defendants in the correct orientation, 2014/24646 of the Criminal Court of First Instance 2013/230 of the Criminal Court of First Instance 2013/279 decision no. file was brought and the file was examined and the statements contained in this file should be determined and determined as a result of the determination and determination of the legal status of the accused should be,

Conclusion: contrary to the law, since the appeals of the defendant’s defense are considered in place in this respect, the provision is 8/1 of law 5320. in accordance with article 321 of Cmuk No. 1412 in force. on 23.06.2016, it was decided by unanimous decision.