SUPREME COURT 11. Criminal Department Base: 2014/2326, Decision: 2014/2512

On 09/12/2013 day and 25/12/2013 day and PUK, organized by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Supreme Court in reference to the request of the General Directorate of Criminal Affairs of the Ministry of Justice to overturn the law No. 75000/2013/18498.with the notification numbered 2013/398784;

Regarding the acquittal of the debtor as a result of the trial conducted against the defendant for violating the payment requirement …5. Regarding the acceptance of the appeal against the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 26/01/2012 and based on 2011/684, dated 2012/29 and the defendant will be sentenced to up to 3 months of suspended imprisonment …6. In the examination of the file covering the decision of the Executive Criminal Court dated 14/06/2012 and numbered 2012/70;

03/02/2011 contains the defendant’s commitment dated liabilities required to be paid in the minutes of the total amount of all types was calculated and should be clearly displayed, along with the individual, with interest receivables incurred the following expenses until the date of commitment the commitment of clearly did not take place, as the affidavit of the creditor’s attorney that the absence of a waiver of them, therefore, that the defendant was legally invalid and of the commitments of the charge in question, without taking into account whether, instead of hitting the rejection of the objection in writing to the admission decision has not been seen in the code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 bet 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:

Since the thought in the notice issued in reference to the contents of the file being examined, the request to disrupt it for the benefit of the law, is seen in place, …6. 309 of CMK No. 5271 of the decision of the Executive Criminal Court No. 14.06.2012 of the day and No. 70/2012 on various Works. since it is possible to decide on this issue in accordance with Article 309/4-d of the CMK, it was decided unanimously on 13.02.2014 that the defendant should not be sentenced to life imprisonment, the file was TRANSFERRED to the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Court of Cassation, since it was possible to be decided in accordance with Article 309/4-d of the CMK.