Abstract
The subject of this commentary is the judgment of the Supreme Court of 22 March 2017, reference number III K 349/16. The commentary contains arguments approving the position of the Supreme Court regarding the classification of the use of a stolen ATM card as theft with burglary. The author shares the view that performing a non-cash operation with the appropriated ATM card was a crime under Art. 279 of the Criminal Code. In the conclusions, however, the author indicates the need for the legislator to take appropriate actions to regulate the disputed issues.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
