Criminal defense for Embezzlement in Bonn

Legal Basis

§ 246 StGB

Sentencing Range

Imprisonment of up to three years or a fine; up to five years for entrusted property

Summary

Unlawfully appropriating a movable object belonging to another that is already in one's possession

An accusation of misappropriation under Section 246 StGB concerns keeping an item that was already in your possession – and must be carefully distinguished from theft. Much turns on whether an act of appropriation is actually shown. Attorney Philip Bafteh defends accused persons in Bonn, Cologne and nationwide – on the basis of the case file.

Embezzlement / Misappropriation (Section 246 German Criminal Code) – Criminal Defense Against Misappropriation Charges

Misappropriation (Embezzlement) covers the unlawful appropriation of a movable object belonging to another that is already in the offender’s possession. Unlike theft, misappropriation does not require a breach of custody – the offender already has the object in their control and then unlawfully appropriates it. For expats in Germany, this is an important distinction, as keeping borrowed items, found objects, or overpaid amounts can constitute a criminal offence.

Statutory Text – Section 246 StGB

Paragraph 1: Whoever unlawfully appropriates a movable object belonging to another for themselves or a third party shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three years or a fine, unless the act is subject to a more severe penalty under other provisions.

Paragraph 2: If the object was entrusted to the offender, the penalty shall be imprisonment of up to five years or a fine.

Elements of the Offence in Detail

Movable object belonging to another: The object must belong to another person and be movable. Money and securities are also covered. Ownerless objects are not included.

Appropriation: Appropriation is the central element. It occurs when the offender incorporates the object or its economic value and permanently excludes the owner from using it. The appropriation must manifest externally – for instance through sale, consumption, use as one’s own, or denying possession to the rightful owner.

Unlawfulness: The appropriation must be unlawful. A person who has a contractual right to retain or exploit the object does not act unlawfully.

Entrustment (para. 2): The qualified offence of embezzlement requires that the object was entrusted to the offender – that is, transferred on the basis of a special relationship of trust (loan, safekeeping, mandate).

Typical Methods of Commission

Misappropriation arises in practice through keeping a found object (finder’s misappropriation), failing to return borrowed items, private use of equipment or vehicles provided for professional purposes, retaining funds intended for another person, and selling objects given for safekeeping. Keeping goods received in error or an overpaid amount can also constitute misappropriation.

Sentencing Range

Simple misappropriation is punished with imprisonment of up to three years or a fine. Embezzlement of entrusted property (para. 2) carries imprisonment of up to five years or a fine. For low-value items, prosecution is only on application (Section 248a StGB). Misappropriation is a subsidiary catch-all offence: where theft or robbery is established, misappropriation is displaced.

Typical Defense Strategies

Defense against misappropriation charges frequently focuses on whether an appropriation actually took place. Simply forgetting to return an item or a misunderstanding about the right to use it does not constitute appropriation. It is further examined whether the accused may have had a right to possession – for instance based on a right of retention or a contractual agreement. In cases of finder’s misappropriation, it is relevant whether the finder fulfilled their obligations under Section 965 of the Civil Code. BAFTEH Criminal Defense comprehensively analyses the facts and develops a defense strategy aimed at the best possible protection of the accused’s rights.

Summons or accusation of Embezzlement? What matters now

Make no statement to the police at first

As an accused person you are never obliged to comment on the allegation. Anything said to the police can be used against you. Provide statements only through your defense attorney and only after reviewing the case file.

File inspection comes first

A sound defense against the allegation of Embezzlement requires knowledge of the investigation file. Only once the available evidence is clear can we decide whether a statement is advisable or whether remaining silent is the better strategy.

Possible discontinuation of proceedings

Not every case ends in a trial. Depending on the evidence and any prior record, the proceedings may be discontinued for lack of sufficient suspicion (§ 170 II StPO), for triviality (§ 153 StPO) or subject to conditions (§ 153a StPO). Often a penalty order without a public trial can be achieved.

Victim-offender mediation and restitution

In many cases, victim-offender mediation or making good the damage (§ 46a StGB) can significantly reduce the sentence or enable a discontinuation. Whether this is advisable in your case is something we assess based on the file.

What we do after reviewing the file

We examine the evidence for reliability and admissibility, look for procedural errors, develop the defense strategy, seek a dismissal of the proceedings through discussions with the public prosecutor’s office and represent you, if necessary, at trial before the Bonn Local Court or Bonn Regional Court.

Available 24/7: +49 228 504 463 36

This information does not replace a review of the individual case. In criminal proceedings, the defense strategy depends substantially on the case file, the specific allegation and the evidence.