Panjaitan, Fajli Ansyahri (2023) Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Pembuktian Dalam Perkara Perbankan (studi Kasus). Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 181010157.pdf - Submitted Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Criminal acts in the banking sector can be committed by the bank or unscrupulous bank employees who take advantage of their position to enrich themselves or the interests of others. An example of case decision number 841/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Pbr shows that Tarry Dwi Cahya as a teller for Bank BJB Pekanbaru Branch and Indra Osmer Gunawan Hutauruk as Consumer Manager for Bank BJB Pekanbaru Branch Office made false records without the knowledge of others for their own benefit , and the actions of Tarry Dwi Cahya are included in concurrent actions or concursus realists. The formulation of the problem in this research is what is the process of proving in the Case Study Banking case Number 841/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Pbr and what is the consideration of the Panel of Judges regarding the Case Study Banking case Number 841/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Pbr The method used by the author in this study is the Normative legal research method, namely library law research, which is a method or method used in legal research conducted by examining existing library materials and linking it to the decision of the Pekanbaru District Court judge who decided Case Number: 841/ Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Pbr Meanwhile, the nature of this research is descriptive, that is, the author tries to provide a detailed description. Namely describing the problems that were found to be related to each other in a relevant and logical and juridical way to find out a clear and detailed description of the decision case 841/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Pbr Based on the results of the research, the evidence in the banking case that Tarry Dwi Cahya has committed the crime of false registration 5 times, which is included in Article 49 of Law Number 10 of 1998 concerning Banking. Documentary evidence from the National Police and OJK expert testimony, as well as the defendant's confession can be used as valid evidence in accordance with Article 184 paragraph (1) letters a and b of the Criminal Procedure Code. Coupled with the testimony of the witness fulfilling certain requirements in accordance with Article 184 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The defendant did not follow the SOP and did not fulfill the formal requirements in some of these transactions. The proving process has complied with the proving provisions that the defendant's actions fulfill the elements of a criminal act. The Panel of Judges' considerations took into account the Public Prosecutor's cumulative indictment, and the facts of the trial, the Defendant was sentenced to 6 years in prison and a fine of IDR 10 billion or an alternative to 2 months in prison if the fine is not paid. The defendant's actions included concurcus realis and were subject to Article 49 paragraph (1) letter a of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 10 of 1998 concerning Banking. The panel of judges must calculate the penalty based on the maximum penalty that is punishable for the act, the maximum maximum sentence plus one third.

Actions (login required)

View Item