The crime of using a bond without value

The offence of abuse of using a bond without value has not been regulated in the first form of the repealed Turkish Penal Code numbered 765; In 1936, it was added to Article 509 by Law No. 3038. As a matter of fact, this offence was not regulated in the Italian Penal Code, which is a clause of Law No. 765. The offence of using a bond without value was not regulated separately in the fourth chapter under the heading of offences against property under the title of abuse of security; this offence was regulated as one of the optional acts of security abuse. In the period of the Turkish Penal Code numbered 5237, the offence of using a bond without value found body as an original type of offence in Article 156, which is a offence against property. In this study the criticisms in the doctrine regarding the unnecessaryness of establishing this crime as an original type of crime during the period of TPC numbered 765 have been analyzed. It has been concluded that it is necessary to regulate this crime as an independent crime type and that this issue is not contrary to the ultima ratio principle. In the research of the legal value protected by this crime, the views in the doctrine that the legal value protected by this crime is one-dimensional, have been criticized and it has been concluded that the legal value protected in this crime is double-dimensional In the title of trial, the effect of the decision of the civil court on the criminal court regarding the proof of this offence and the blank of the bond is peculiar. It was revealed that the Supreme Court's unified decision and the decision that the rule of proof would be valid for this offence was erroneous in terms of legal technique; however, it has been concluded that the rule of proof by promissory note will serve the purpose in a criminal proceeding regarding the bond as per the principle of benefit. In this context, it has been concluded that an application contrary to the basic proof rule of criminal procedure should be stipulated by the law, not by the Supreme Court's unified decision. In the last part of this chapter, considering the expertise of civil courts on bonds, it is concluded that criminal courts should be bound by the court decisions on this issue.