Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 2/2012 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court holds that multiple minor thefts constitute a crime when viewed as a whole.

Numero d'incarto KKO 2/2012
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court ruled that the defendant's multiple instances of stealing small items from various stores constituted a crime when evaluated collectively. The prosecution argued that the aggregate value and frequency of the thefts met the criminal threshold despite individual acts being minor. The court agreed, establishing that the totality of acts determines criminal liability rather than isolated instances.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

RL 28 luku 3 § 1 mom; The court held that multiple minor thefts, when considered as a whole, satisfy the requirements for criminal prosecution under the Penal Code.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
multiple thefts aggregate value criminal threshold minor offenses collective evaluation Penal Code theft liability cosa di poco valore

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
RL 28 luku 3 § 1 mom
Generato dall'IA
kko-other_2012_3
Supreme Court held that multiple minor thefts constitute a crime when viewed as a whole.
kko-precedent_2011_66
Supreme Court reclassified petty thefts as snatching and reduced sentence due to significant change in charge classification.
appeal_1986_vaasa__1729
Court holds that thefts committed in the same building and during the same incident constitute a single crime.
appeal_1983_helsinki__189
Court dismisses theft charges where defendant stole construction materials using his own excavator on a site where he worked.
kko-precedent_1994_66
Supreme Court reduces theft charge to simple theft because stolen weapons were not extremely valuable to the owner.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

A oli anastanut usealla eri kerralla eri myymälöistä vähäisinä pidettäviä määriä omaisuutta, muun muassa postimerkkejä, puukkoja, olutta, tupakkaa, elintarvikkeita, vaatteita ja bensiiniä. Kysymys siitä, oliko anastuksia kokonaisuutena arvostellen pidettävä vähäisinä.

RL 28 luku 3 § 1 mom