An individual receives money from a buyer for a goods transaction. However, because they previously suffered losses from another transaction, the money from the new buyer is used to cover old obligations. As a result, the goods are not sent, the buyer requests a refund, and then files a police report. The reported party has been summoned, there has been an attempt at a peaceful resolution, but the reporter refuses installments and demands a full refund. The reporter's legal counsel also threatens to sue in civil court. Then, does the legal status include fraud, embezzlement, or a civil dispute?
What is Online Sales Fraud? Analysis of Article 492 of the Criminal Code
The buyer's money is used to cover old debts, and then the goods are not sent. Is this fraud, embezzlement, or a civil dispute? See the legal analysis.
Ilustrasi penjelasan perbedaan penipuan dan penggelapan dalam konteks jual beli online.
(Source: AI Gemini, Redaksi Literasi Hukum Indonesia)
Question
Case the buyer's money is used to cover debts does not automatically become a mere debt-receivable matter, but it cannot always be directly ascertained as fraud. The determining point lies in two things: intention from the beginning of the transaction and how the money was received and then used. In the new Criminal Code, fraud regulated in Article 492 with the threat of 4 years imprisonment or category V fine, whereas embezzlement regulated in Article 486 with the threat of 4 years imprisonment or category IV fine.
Full Review
Thanks for your question. Read the full analysis below.
Table of Contents
Is Using Buyer's Money to Cover Debt Considered Fraud?
To assess whether this case constitutes fraud, what should be examined is not merely the fact that the goods were ultimately not delivered. What is most important is whether from the outset there was a false name, false legal standing, trickery, or a series of lies intentionally used to induce the buyer to hand over money. That is the essence of the formulation of Article 492 of the new Criminal Code.
Explanation Article 492 affirms that fraud is only complete when the aggrieved party performs the act desired by the perpetrator, namely handing over goods, granting credit, making an acknowledgment of debt, or waiving receivables. The explanation also affirms that the perpetrator's efforts are limitative: false name, false position, abuse of religion, deception, and a series of false words, and there must be a causal relationship between the deception and the surrender from the victim.
Therefore,the buyer's money is used to cover old debts it tends to be read as fraud if from the beginning the seller already knew that the goods would not be sent, or from the beginning already intended to receive the buyer's money for other purposes while still making the buyer believe that the transaction would run normally. In this position, the lie at the beginning of the transaction becomes the heart of the matter.
Support
• Indonesian Legal Literacy
Read more comfortably, while supporting literacy.
Join Membership or submit your article for publication.
Membership
Read without ads, focus more, and access premium features.
Submit Article
Submit your writing—we curate and help publish it. If it is published, you have the opportunity to earn points/payouts according to the terms.
Related Articles
See more
Popular Articles
Latest News
View all news
Public Space
See All
Pasang Iklan
Write a comment