ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM DALAM MEMBEDAKAN TINDAK PIDANA PENIPUAN DAN WANPRESTASI (STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 2072 KPID2025)

Abstract

This study analyzes the differences in judicial reasoning in Supreme Court Decision Number 2072 K/Pid/2025 regarding the distinction between fraud under Article 378 of the Indonesian Criminal Code and breach of contract. The case arose from a loan agreement worth IDR 1,731,000,000, resulting in conflicting decisions at the District Court, High Court, and Supreme Court levels. This research employs normative legal research using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The findings reveal that the differing judicial reasoning stems from the absence of a uniform standard in interpreting Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 4/Yur/Pid/2018, particularly the phrase "bad faith from the outset." The Supreme Court's reasoning is considered the most appropriate because it applies four cumulative factual indicators consistent with the doctrine of opzet als oogmerk and the establishment of mens rea through circumstantial evidence. This study formulates four parameters for proving fraudulent intent based on circumstantial evidence: the existence of the underlying transaction, consistency between the use of funds and the stated purpose, the transaction mechanism, and the consistency of the defendant's conduct before, during, and after receiving the loan.