INCREASING THE PRICE BY FAKING THE PRICE PART OF THE PROMISSORY NOTE

T.C. SUPREME COURT 11. CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT E. 2013/755, K. 2015/22745, T. 23.02.2015

• THE LAWYER PUTS A TRACKING DOCUMENT THAT HE KNOWS THAT FALSIFICATION HAS BEEN MADE AT THE COST ( Forgery of the Official Document-The Defendant Argues That He Does Not Know That Falsification Has Been Made on the Deed Subject to Crime/The Defendant’s Acquittal Will Be Decided Because Evidence Has Not Been Obtained Except for the Changing and Sincere Statements of the Alleged Falsifier )
• INCREASING THE PRICE BY FAKING THE PART OF THE BILL OF EXCHANGE (The Claim That the Lawyer Committed the Crime of Forgery in the Official Document by Tracking the Bill Knowing That It Was Falsified – The Defendant Did Not Know That the Bill of Exchange was Falsified/The Person Who Allegedly Falsified It Should Be Acquitted Because Evidence Could Not Be Obtained Except for the Statements of the Person Who Allegedly Changed and Was Not Considered Sincere )
• Forgery ( forgery Lawyer claim to have committed the crime of knowing that the pursuit was putting stock Tampering – tampering on the defendant’s promissory note was the subject of a crime you didn’t know that in the advocate/the changing of the alleged tampering and sincere person except for statements that are not seen Evidence could not be obtained and acquitted will be given).

5237/m. 204

ABSTRACT: A public lawsuit has been filed against the defendant, who is a lawyer, for allegedly committing the crime of forgery of an official document by his client, knowing that the price was increased by falsifying the deed and putting it into execution. The defendant argued that he did not know that the deed subject to the crime had been tampered with during the stages. Except for the abstract statement of his client, which changes in stages and is not considered sincere, it is necessary to decide on the acquittal of the defendant, given that sufficient definite, concrete and clear evidence cannot be obtained for his conviction, and his acquittal must be decided.

THE CASE : The file was examined and considered necessary:

DECISION : 1-The defendant, who is a lawyer, is A. Y. as a proxy, the creditor is A. Y., the debtor victim A. He. you have a 2800 TL bond that is A. Y. in the public case filed by the defendant for allegedly committing the crime of forgery of an official document by putting it into execution knowing that the price was increased to TL 12,800 by falsifying the part of the price, the defendant argued that he did not know that the deed subject to the crime was falsified at stages, A. Y.in addition to the abstract statement, which changes at different stages and is not considered sincere, the conviction of the accused cannot be determined on insufficient grounds instead of acquittal, given that sufficient concrete, concrete and clear evidence cannot be obtained,

2-According to the decision; TCK No. 5237, which is the legal result of a conviction for a prison sentence for a deliberate crime, is also accepted.nun 53. Article 1. failure to provide for deprivation of rights written in paragraph,

CONCLUSION: It is against the law that the appeals of the accused have been considered on the spot because of this reason, the provision is 8/1 of Law No. 5320. CMUK No. 1412, which should be applied in accordance with the article.nun 321. its violation in accordance with the article was unanimously decided on the day of 23.02.2015