Pertimbangan Hakim Atas Pencurian dengan Modus Carding Berdasarkan Pasal 362 KUHP Jo. Undang–undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 Atas Perubahan Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 Tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik

Q2 Arts and Humanities Veritas Pub Date : 2022-03-21 DOI:10.34005/veritas.v8i1.900
Agung Mahardika, Uu Idjuddin Solihin
{"title":"Pertimbangan Hakim Atas Pencurian dengan Modus Carding Berdasarkan Pasal 362 KUHP Jo. Undang–undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 Atas Perubahan Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 Tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik","authors":"Agung Mahardika, Uu Idjuddin Solihin","doi":"10.34005/veritas.v8i1.900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This journal discusses the consideration of judges in deciding a crime of one of the Cyber ​​Crime crimes namely Carding. Especially in the case of regulating the Carding crime, the factors of the perpetrators committing the Caeding crime, as well as the consideration of the judge in giving a verdict on the Carding crime. research conducted by studying and examining library legal materials, data collection is done by examining secondary data using primary legal data in the form of a court decision. As well as secondary data. Carding is a crime that is fairly new in Cyber ​​Crime which is a transnational crime but occupies the highest position in Indonesia compared to other Cyber ​​Crime crimes. there is no specific regulation or regulation regarding the crime of Carding despite the existence of Law Number 11 of 2018 as amended by Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions and the application of Articles of the Criminal Code but are deemed inappropriate. Law enforcers often have difficulty in overcoming and mismatch in upholding in preventing Carding cases, especially judges to uphold justice which is actually proven or not proven by a defendant committing a crime based on the judge's decision. \nKeywords: Carding Criminal Acts, Judge Considerations","PeriodicalId":37834,"journal":{"name":"Veritas","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veritas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34005/veritas.v8i1.900","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This journal discusses the consideration of judges in deciding a crime of one of the Cyber ​​Crime crimes namely Carding. Especially in the case of regulating the Carding crime, the factors of the perpetrators committing the Caeding crime, as well as the consideration of the judge in giving a verdict on the Carding crime. research conducted by studying and examining library legal materials, data collection is done by examining secondary data using primary legal data in the form of a court decision. As well as secondary data. Carding is a crime that is fairly new in Cyber ​​Crime which is a transnational crime but occupies the highest position in Indonesia compared to other Cyber ​​Crime crimes. there is no specific regulation or regulation regarding the crime of Carding despite the existence of Law Number 11 of 2018 as amended by Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions and the application of Articles of the Criminal Code but are deemed inappropriate. Law enforcers often have difficulty in overcoming and mismatch in upholding in preventing Carding cases, especially judges to uphold justice which is actually proven or not proven by a defendant committing a crime based on the judge's decision. Keywords: Carding Criminal Acts, Judge Considerations
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法官根据刑法第362条判定盗窃。2016年第19号法案,修改2008年第11号电子信息和交易法案
本文探讨了法官在判定网络犯罪中的一种犯罪即“刷牌罪”时应考虑的问题。特别是在规范梳理犯罪案件中,梳理犯罪行为人构成梳理犯罪的因素,以及法官在梳理犯罪判决时的考量。通过研究和检查图书馆法律资料进行的研究,数据收集是通过使用法院判决形式的主要法律数据检查次要数据来完成的。以及辅助数据。梳理是网络犯罪中相当新的犯罪,这是一种跨国犯罪,但与其他网络犯罪相比,在印度尼西亚占据最高地位。虽然有《2018年第11号法》(经《电子信息与交易》2016年第19号法修订)和《刑法》条款的适用,但没有针对梳理犯罪的具体规定或规定,但被认为是不适当的。在防止梳理案件中,执法人员往往难以克服维护错配的问题,特别是法官根据法官的判决,维护被告人犯罪事实证明或未证明的正义。关键词:犯罪行为梳理,法官考量
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Veritas
Veritas Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: VERITAS, Revista de Filosofía y Teología fue fundada en 1994 por el Pontificio Seminario Mayor San Rafael de Valparaíso (Chile). A partir del año 2017 es una publicación cuatrimestral (Abril, Agosto y Diciembre). El idioma habitual de la revista es el español, aunque queda abierta la posibilidad para publicar artículos en otros idiomas, tales como inglés, francés, italiano o portugués. VERITAS tiene como objetivo difundir entre los académicos y estudiantes del seminario, así como también de otras instituciones eclesiásticas y universitarias, nacionales y extranjeras, el resultado de la investigación en las áreas de la Filosofía y la Teología. Así, y desde su talante católico, pretende llevar a cabo una contribución de actualidad y rigor científico que promueva la reflexión y el debate abierto en la vida académica.
期刊最新文献
Hegel e a analítica da racialidade de Denise Ferreira da Silva doutrina de Hegel da “sociedade civil” e a economia política do Iluminismo Escocês Avicena e o problema do sujeito da metafísica Além do tempo Testemunhar é possível?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1