HUBUNGAN PENIPUAN PERDATA ATAU BEDROG DENGAN PENIPUAN PIDANA, STUDI KASUS PENGALIHAN SAHAM SECARA MELAWAN HUKUM PADA PT BPII

Abstrak

Penipuan dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia diatur baik dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata (“KUHPer”) maupun Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (“KUHP”). Dalam KUHPer pasal 1321 dan 1328 dikenal istilah Bedrog atau Penipuan Perdata yang secara formil saksinya diatur dalam Pasal 378 KUHP sedang dalam KUHPer disebutkan bahwa Penipuan Perdata atau Bedrog ini konsekuensinya adalah Pembatalan Perjanjian. Dalam jurnal ini Penulis ingin membahas hubungan antara Penipuan Perdata dengan Penipuan Pidana melalui Kasus Dugaan Penipuan atau Penggelapan 400 lembar saham PT BPII oleh Pemegang Saham melalui Tipu Daya menggunakan Surat Pernyataan Ahli Waris tentang Penunjukkan Pemegang Saham dan Chat Whatsapp serta implikasi pidananya sesuai Pasal 378 KUHP juncto Pasal 372 KUHP. Penulis juga ingin menunjukkan hubungan dan penerapan pasal- pasal yaitu 1321 KUHPer dan 1328 KUHPer , Pasal 56 ayat 3 Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas (“UU PT”) No. 40 tahuun 2007 serta Pasal 5 ayat 4 Undang- Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (“UU ITE”) No. 11 tahun 2008 dalam membantu penegakan hukum terkait pembuktian dugaan Tindak Pidana Penipuan dan Penggelapan tersebut sesuai Pasal 378 KUHP juncto Pasal 372 KUHP.

Fraud in the Indonesian Legal System is regulated both in the Civil Code ("KUHPer") and the Criminal Code ("KUHP"). In the Civil Code, Articles 1321 and 1328 mention the term Bedrog or Civil Fraud, which formally has its witness provisions regulated in Article 378 of the Criminal Code, while in the Civil Code it is stated that the consequence of Civil Fraud or Bedrog is the annulment of the agreement. In this journal, the author intends to discuss the relationship between Civil Fraud and Criminal Fraud through the case of alleged fraud or embezzlement of 400 shares of PT BPII by shareholders through deception using a Statement of Heir regarding the Appointment of Shareholders and Whatsapp Chats as well as its criminal implications according to Article 378 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 372 of the Criminal Code. The author also wishes to show the relationship and application of the following articles: Articles 1321 and 1328 of the Civil Code, Article 56 paragraph 3 of the Limited Liability Company Law ("UU PT") No. 40 of 2007, as well as Article 5 paragraph 4 of the Information and Electronic Transactions Law (“ITE Law”) No. 11 of 2008 assists in law enforcement related to the evidence of alleged Fraud and Embezzlement offenses in accordance with Article 378 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 372 of the Criminal Code.