Criminal liability regarding the Crime of Motor Vehicle Theft that this crime was committed by 2 people in which the defendant's actions were regulated and also threatened in Article 365 paragraph (2) of the 2nd Criminal Code. However, in this case there are still many people who commit the crime of motor vehicle theft in various ways even though the government has issued such regulations or legislation. As will be examined in this article, namely how is the criminal responsibility of the perpetrators against the perpetrators of the crime of motor vehicle theft in Decision No. 239/Pid.B/2021/PN.KBU? What is the basis for the judge's consideration in deciding the case against the perpetrators of the crime of motor vehicle theft in Decision No. 239/Pid.B/2021/PN.KBU? The author in this study used empirical juridical research methods and normative juridical research. In empirical research, the author conducts interviews with related sources and in normative research, including literature, legislation, legal theory, and also judges' decisions. Also, empirical legal research includes legal identification, legal effectiveness, and law implementation. From the results of the research, criminal liability against the perpetrator is a criminal act that is proven guilty and convinces the judge to convict the defendant with a criminal act of motor vehicle theft as regulated in Article 365 paragraph (2) of the 2nd Criminal Code, and the defendant fulfills the element of criminal responsibility. And the basis for the judge's consideration is to consider 2 (two) considerations, namely juridical considerations and non-juridical considerations. Based on this, the punishment should be adjusted to the threats that have been stipulated in the applicable legislation, and the judge should also pay attention to the impact of this crime even though in this case it did not take any lives but must be punished according to the regulations in order to provide a deterrent effect and reduce the level of crime. his crime.
Read full abstract