Menu
En iyi Manavgat Avukatı
  • Anasayfa
  • Biz
  • İletişim
  • Blog
Close Menu
11/06/2022

Insult Is Not a Crime in Exchange for a Tort

Rabia Ekşi Uncategorized @tr alanya, antalya, law, lawyer, mahmutlar

T.C.

SUPREME

14.CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT

E.2013/5363

K.2015/2314

T.2.3.2015

INSULT ( Since It was Committed in Response to a Wrongful Act, It Should Be Decided That There is No Room for Punishment )
TORT ( Since the Insult Was Committed in Response to a Tort, It Will Be Decided That There is No Room for Punishment)
SIMPLE SEXUAL ASSAULT (There Is Animosity Between the Accused Who Participated and the One Who Was Declared – There is No Conclusive and Convincing Evidence / The Decriminalization of the Accused Will Be Ruled Out)
ANIMOSITY BETWEEN THE PARTICIPATING DEFENDANTS (Simple Sexual Assault / There Is Animosity Between the Participating Defendant And the Participating Defendant Whose Statement Has Been Received – Dec Decriminalization Will Be Decided About the Defendant)
5237/m.102,125,129

ABSTRACT: Since the insult was committed in response to a wrongful act, it should be decided that there is no place for direct punishment by betting, while the conviction provision is established first and then the application of the said article is against the law.

In the case of a simple crime of sexual assault; the Decriminalization of the accused who participated should be decided in the face of the absence of any definite, concrete and convincing evidence, far from any doubt that the crime occurred, except for the statements of the aforementioned person who had a animosity between the accused and the participating defendant.

CASE: The provisions issued by the local court were appealed and the file was examined and considered as necessary:

VERDICT : The defendant involved is S. about the intentional infliction of injury and threats, the defendant A. and I. in the examination of the provisions established for the crimes of intentional injury in their rights:

Article 26 of the Law No. 6217, which entered into force on 14.4.2011. provisional article 2, which was added to the Law No. 5320. fines of up to TL 3,000 (including) imposed as a result, except for those transferred from imprisonment by the article, are final and are No. 1412 as of the amount of penalties imposed on the defendants participating in the C.M.U.K.nin305/1. since it is not possible to appeal the provisions that are final and mentioned in accordance with article A, the defendant A.Law No. 5320 of the Russian Federation on the appeal of these provisions 8/1. article 1412 C.M.U.K.nin317. refusal in accordance with the article,

The defendant involved is S. in the examination of the provision established on the offense of defamation:

Refusal of other appeals that are not considered on the spot in accordance with the content of the file reviewed, in accordance with the opinion and discretion of the court formed in accordance with the results of the investigation and prosecution, the evidence collected and shown at the place of decision, the content of the file reviewed,

But;

129/1 of Law No. 5237. according to the article, since the insult was committed in response to a wrongful act, it should be decided that there is no place for direct punishment with a bet, while the conviction provision should be established first and then the application of the said article,

The defendant involved is A. as for the appellate review of the verdict established on the simple charge of sexual assault about:

According to the occurrence and scope of the entire file, A. and S., with whom there is enmity. Dec.in the face of the absence of any definite, concrete and convincing evidence, far from any doubt that the crime occurred, except for the statements of A.decision on the conviction of the person in writing instead of acquittal for a common crime,

CONCLUSION : Contrary to the law, it involved the Public Prosecutor and the defendant A.since the appeals of the are considered to be in place as of this moment, the provisions of Law 8/1 of 5320. article 1412 C.M.U.K.nin321. according to the article, it was decided unanimously on 02.03.2015 to CANCEL it, to return it if the appeal fee was requested.

You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.

Spitting Is Considered An Insult How is an Appeal against Enforcement Proceedings Filed

Related Posts

Uncategorized @tr

Anayasa Mahkemesi 4 sözleşmeli personel alacak

Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığı (Başkanlık) merkez teşkilatında istihdam edilmek üzere, yapılacak sözlü sınav esas alınmak suretiyle, Destek Personeli (Temizlik Görevlisi) pozisyonu için toplam 4 (dört) sözleşmeli personel alınacak. Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığından: 4 (DÖRT) SÖZLEŞMELİ PERSONEL ALIMI HAKKINDA DUYURU Anayasa Mahkemesi Başkanlığı (Başkanlık) merkez teşkilatında 657 sayılı Devlet Memurları Kanunu’nun 4 üncü maddesinin (B) fıkrasına göre istihdam […]

Uncategorized @tr

TBB BAŞKANI SAĞKAN 5 NİSAN AVUKATLAR GÜNÜNDE KONUŞMA YAPTI

Avukatlar, Türkiye Barolar Birliği’nin öncülüğünde 5 Nisan Avukatlar Günü’nde Ankara’da ‘Savunmanın Bağımsızlığı ve Hukuka Saygı’ yürüyüşü yaptı. Barolar adına konuşma yapan Türkiye Barolar Birliği Başkanı Av. R. Erinç Sağkan, “Biz bugün hukuk devletini savunmak için, yargı bağımsızlığını savunmak için buradayız. Bu ses susturulamaz” dedi. “İSTANBUL BAROSU, HUKUKA AYKIRI YARGI KARARLARIYLA GÖREVİNDEN UZAKLAŞTIRILMAK İSTENİYOR” Anıtpark’ta bir […]

Uncategorized @tr

Determination and Recommendations regarding the Main Procedural Problems in Terms of Earthquake-Related Civil Cases

“It is Not Possible to Get Rid of the Responsibility of Those Responsible by Obscuring the Evidence of the Earthquake, On the Contrary, Their Responsibilities Increase” Prof. Dr. Muhammet Özekes (12.02.2023) If the CCP and procedural rules can be applied consciously, correctly and quickly, the judiciary can get out of this earthquake without being in […]

Uncategorized @tr

The Decision of the Council of State that the Consumer Bank Cannot Receive Account Operating Fees

COUNCIL OF STATE 15. apartment Basis: 2014/9570 Verdict: 2018/1194 Plaintiff : Consumer Problems Association Acting Director : Av… Respondent : Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency Acting Director : Av… Summary of the Case: Article 10 of the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles regarding Fees to be Collected from Financial Consumers, which entered into force […]

Uncategorized @tr

Negative Detection Case Based on the Guarantee Bond Claim, Exchange Monitoring Supreme Court Decision

T.C. SUPREME 19. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2016/3357 DECISION NO: 2016/13899 DECISION DATE: 24.10.2016 >> FOREIGN EXCHANGE MONITORING, NEGATIVE DETECTION CASE BASED ON THE CLAIM THAT THE BILL IS A SECURITY BILL, BURDEN OF PROOF AND STATE OF EVIDENCE 6100/m.222/5 6102/m.64 SUMMARY: The case is related to the request for negative determination. The plaintiff has […]

Back To Top
manavgat avukat

İletişim:

+905425139898

+902425139898

info@antalya.law

Adres

Hacet Mahallesi, Canlılar Sokak,
Avukatlar İş Merkezi, No: 7, Daire: 2-3
Alanya / Antalya

Copyright © 2020 Aşıkoğlu Hukuk ™ Aşıkoğlu Uluslararası Hukuk Bürosu, Her Hakkı Saklıdır

WhatsApp us