Javascript must be enabled to continue!
PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA PELAKU PENGALIHAN OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA TANPA PERSETUJUAN TERTULIS DARI PENERIMA FIDUSIA (Studi Putusan Nomor: 56/Pid.Sus/2019/PN Mnd)
View through CrossRef
The crime of transferring the object of fiduciary security is a crime in the field of fiduciary security which iscarried out by selling the object of the fiduciary security which has not yet been paid off by the payment creditto a third party without written approval from a company as the recipient of the fiduciary. The problems in thisstudy are how the criminal liability of the perpetrator of the transfer of the object of fiduciary security withoutwritten consent from the fiduciary recipient (Study of Decision No.56/Pid.Sus/2019/PN Mnd) and how thejudge's considerations are based in imposing sanctions on the perpetrator of the transfer of the object. fiduciaryguarantee without written consent from the fiduciary recipient (Study of Decision No.56/Pid.Sus/2019/PNMnd).The Legal Research Method used in this thesis is a normative juridical method, namely the analysis carried outto collect data by means of a literature study. This study uses primary legal materials, namely Law Number 42of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees and this study also uses secondary legal materials in the form ofjournal publications on law and various related literature to answer problems in the Study of Decision No.56/Pid. Sus/2019/PN Mnd.Based on the results of research conducted in the Study of Decision Number 56/Pid.Sus /2019/PN Mnd, it canbe concluded that based on the judge's considerations in imposing a crime against the perpetrator who transferred the object of fiduciary security without written consent from the fiduciary recipient, the defendanthas fulfilled the elements and violates Article 36 of Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees,he is sentenced to imprisonment for 7 (seven) months and a fine of Rp. 10,000,000 (ten million rupiah) with theprovision that if the fine is not paid, it is replaced with imprisonment for 2 (two) months.
Universitas HKBP Nommensen Medan
Title: PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA PELAKU PENGALIHAN OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA TANPA PERSETUJUAN TERTULIS DARI PENERIMA FIDUSIA (Studi Putusan Nomor: 56/Pid.Sus/2019/PN Mnd)
Description:
The crime of transferring the object of fiduciary security is a crime in the field of fiduciary security which iscarried out by selling the object of the fiduciary security which has not yet been paid off by the payment creditto a third party without written approval from a company as the recipient of the fiduciary.
The problems in thisstudy are how the criminal liability of the perpetrator of the transfer of the object of fiduciary security withoutwritten consent from the fiduciary recipient (Study of Decision No.
56/Pid.
Sus/2019/PN Mnd) and how thejudge's considerations are based in imposing sanctions on the perpetrator of the transfer of the object.
fiduciaryguarantee without written consent from the fiduciary recipient (Study of Decision No.
56/Pid.
Sus/2019/PNMnd).
The Legal Research Method used in this thesis is a normative juridical method, namely the analysis carried outto collect data by means of a literature study.
This study uses primary legal materials, namely Law Number 42of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees and this study also uses secondary legal materials in the form ofjournal publications on law and various related literature to answer problems in the Study of Decision No.
56/Pid.
Sus/2019/PN Mnd.
Based on the results of research conducted in the Study of Decision Number 56/Pid.
Sus /2019/PN Mnd, it canbe concluded that based on the judge's considerations in imposing a crime against the perpetrator who transferred the object of fiduciary security without written consent from the fiduciary recipient, the defendanthas fulfilled the elements and violates Article 36 of Law No.
42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees,he is sentenced to imprisonment for 7 (seven) months and a fine of Rp.
10,000,000 (ten million rupiah) with theprovision that if the fine is not paid, it is replaced with imprisonment for 2 (two) months.
Related Results
Pertanggungjawaban Pidana terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Kepemilikan Serbuk Ampo sebagai Bahan Peledak (Studi Putusan Nomor: 488/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Tjk)
Pertanggungjawaban Pidana terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Kepemilikan Serbuk Ampo sebagai Bahan Peledak (Studi Putusan Nomor: 488/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Tjk)
One of the cases regarding possession of explosives is in Decision Number: 488/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Tjk which states that the defendant Kurniawan Azhar Amran Bin M. Rosyid is guilty of ...
ANALISIS KONTRAK ADIRA FINANCE DALAM HAL JAMINAN FIDUSIA
ANALISIS KONTRAK ADIRA FINANCE DALAM HAL JAMINAN FIDUSIA
Studi ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan mengenai Perjanjian yang penandatanganannya tidak dihadapan Notaris, padahal dalam pasal 5 ayat 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Ja...
Akibat Hukum Penarikan Objek Jaminan Fidusia Tanpa Surat Perintah Pengadilan Oleh Perusahaan Leasing
Akibat Hukum Penarikan Objek Jaminan Fidusia Tanpa Surat Perintah Pengadilan Oleh Perusahaan Leasing
Abstract. A fiduciary security certificate has an executorial nature, equivalent to an inkrah court decision. Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2021 changed the p arate...
Menelaah prinsip keadilan, kemanfaatan, dan kepastian terhadap perkara pidana anak : tinjauan terhadap putusan pengadilan nomor 2/pid.sus-anak/2016/pn mtr
Menelaah prinsip keadilan, kemanfaatan, dan kepastian terhadap perkara pidana anak : tinjauan terhadap putusan pengadilan nomor 2/pid.sus-anak/2016/pn mtr
Nemo Punitur Sine Injuria Facto Seu Defalta yang artinya tidak ada seorang pun yang dihukum kecuali ia berbuat salah. Setiap orang yang melakukan perbuatan pidana belum tentu dijat...
Perkembangan Konsep Dasar Jaminan Fidusia dalam Praktik
Perkembangan Konsep Dasar Jaminan Fidusia dalam Praktik
Semakin meningkatnya kebutuhan masyarakat di bidang ekonomi menjadikan bertambahnya kebutuhan masyarakat terutama dari segi finansial. Maka, untuk melengkapi kebutuhan tersebut dib...
Akibat Hukum Terhadap Tidak Dilakukan Penghapusan (Roya) Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Kredit Lunas
Akibat Hukum Terhadap Tidak Dilakukan Penghapusan (Roya) Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Kredit Lunas
Kewajiban hukum adalah sebuah tindakan yang harus dikerjakan oleh seseorang. Setiap tindakan yang dikerjakan tersebut merupakan bentuk dari rasa tanggung jawab dari permasalahan ya...
Aspek Hukum Sertifikat Hak Paten Sebagai Objek Jaminan Fidusia Menurut Undang - Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 Tentang Paten
Aspek Hukum Sertifikat Hak Paten Sebagai Objek Jaminan Fidusia Menurut Undang - Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 Tentang Paten
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pertama bagaimana pengikatan hak paten sebagai jaminan fidusia dan bagaimana tata cara eksekusi hak paten sebagai jaminan fidusia.Jenis pe...
JAMINAN FIDUSIA DALAM AKAD MURABAHAH DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM POSITIF DAN HUKUM EKONOMI SYARIAH
JAMINAN FIDUSIA DALAM AKAD MURABAHAH DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM POSITIF DAN HUKUM EKONOMI SYARIAH
Jaminan fidusia ialah hak jaminan atas benda bergerak baik itu berwujud atau tidak serta benda tidak bergerak khususnya bangunan yang tidak dapat dibebani hak tanggungan. Jaminan f...

