Turkish Legal Advisor
IS IT A CRIME TO USE FAKE MONEY? LAWS, PUNISHMENTS, AND EXAMPLES
Lawyer Burak Emir Apaydın
Mayıs 28, 2025
CRIMINAL LAW

Entrance

This report has been prepared to answer the user's questions regarding the definition of the crime of counterfeiting money, its penalty, the reasons for increasing and decreasing the penalty, and the points to be considered during the trial. The report is based on the findings obtained by examining the submitted Supreme Court decisions. The aim is to provide a comprehensive, consistent and informative overview of the crime of counterfeiting money.

Main Findings

  1. Definition and Elements of the Crime of Counterfeiting Money

The crime of counterfeiting money is basically regulated in Article 197 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). In the decisions of the Supreme Court, this crime is defined to cover various actions:

  1. Producing Counterfeit Money, Bringing It Into the Country, Transporting It, Keeping It or Putting It Into Circulation: This is the most comprehensive definition. According to the decision of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, numbered 2020/7159 E., 2023/934 K. and dated 01.03.2023, the crime is defined in Article 197/1 of the TCK as "A person who produces counterfeit money, brings it into the country, transports it, keeps it or puts it into circulation, which is legally in circulation in the country or in foreign countries ." A similar definition is also included in the decision numbered 2020/7144 E., 2023/1531 K.
  2. Putting into Circulation (Putting into Market): This is the most common form of operation. This can be in the form of shopping with counterfeit money, paying off a debt, or taking change and exchanging it for real money. For example, in the decision numbered 2023/3136 E., 2024/1990 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, the defendant's action of "paying for his shopping at the market by giving a counterfeit 20.00 TL banknote" is included in this scope. In the decision numbered 2022/2086 E., 2024/2018 K. of the same chamber, it is defined as "putting into circulation 100.00 TL banknotes known to be counterfeit [...] by spending them and taking change" .
  3. Preservation (Possession): Possession of counterfeit money with the intention of putting it into circulation also constitutes this crime. In the decision numbered 2020/7159 E., 2023/934 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was stated that the elements of the crime were that the defendant "preserved the counterfeit money" .
  4. Ability to Deceive (Ability to Seduce): For the crime to occur, the counterfeit money must have the feature of deception. As emphasized in the decision numbered 2016/1435 E., 2019/624 K. of the General Assembly of the Criminal Court of the Supreme Court, "its counterfeitness must not be detectable by the five senses." In other words, it is important that "it is possible for a person who is not experienced and does not subject the money to a special examination to accept this money as real money ." This issue has been confirmed in the decisions numbered 2021/7374 E., 2023/9861 K. and 2021/9318 E., 2023/9755 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court as "it is capable of deceiving and it is not easily understood by everyone at first glance that it is fake due to the degree of care and mastery in its production . "
  5. Intent: The perpetrator must know that the money is counterfeit and act with this awareness (produce, circulate, preserve, etc.). In the decision numbered 2023/479 E., 2023/3679 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, the statement that "the defendant knowingly circulated counterfeit money and therefore must be punished in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 197 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 (Law No. 5237) which is compatible with his action " emphasizes the importance of intent.
  6. Knowingly Sliding Money Received Without Knowing It Is Counterfeit (TCK 197/3): In the dissenting opinion of the Court of Cassation 8th Criminal Chamber's decision numbered 2015/2034 E., 2015/23705 K., a reference was made to TCK 197/3, stating that the act of "sliding money received without knowing it is counterfeit into the market, knowing that it is counterfeit" is also regulated in a separate paragraph.
  1. Penalty for Counterfeiting Money

According to Article 197/1 of the TCK, the basic penalty for the crime of counterfeiting money is determined as " imprisonment from two to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to ten thousand days". This penalty range is confirmed in many decisions such as the decisions of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation No. 2020/7159 E., 2023/934 K.; 2020/7144 E., 2023/1531 K. and 2021/16645 E., 2024/1134 K. The decision of the 15th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation No. 2014/6193 E., 2016/8732 K. also stated that the penalty is " imprisonment from two to twelve years" with reference to Article 197/1 of the TCK . In practice, the penalties given may vary within this range depending on factors such as the way the crime was committed, the role of the defendant, and the amount of counterfeit money. For example, in one decision, it is seen that different amounts of penalties were imposed, such as "2 years and 1 month of imprisonment and a judicial fine" (2021/8390 E.), in another, "5 years of imprisonment and a judicial fine of 83,320.00 TL", and in another, "10 years of imprisonment and a judicial fine of 160,000.00 TL" (2024/16507 E. - within the scope of organized crime).

  1. Factors Increasing the Penalty

The following are highlighted as reasons for increasing the penalty in the Supreme Court decisions:

  1. Committing the Crime in an Organized Manner: In the decision numbered 2024/16507 E., 2024/9903 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it is seen that more severe penalties are given if the crime is committed "within the framework of an organization".
  2. Repetition : If the defendant has been previously convicted of a deliberate crime and commits the crime again within a certain period of time, an increase in the sentence or a change in the execution regime is applied in accordance with Article 58 of the Turkish Penal Code. This situation is stated in the decision numbered 2024/16507 E., 2024/9903 K. as "having the crime punished according to the execution regime specific to repeat offenders " and in the decision numbered 2023/479 E., 2023/3679 K. by discussing the conditions for the application of the repetition provisions.
  3. Manner of Committing the Crime, Intensity of Intent and Damage Caused: In the decision numbered 2021/7997 E., 2023/10383 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, it was stated that "the amount of counterfeit money seized, the severity of the damage caused, the determination of the defendant to commit the same crime against more than one person and the intensity of the criminal intent should be taken into consideration and the basic sentence should be determined by departing from the lower limit ." Similarly, in the decision numbered 2020/19426 E., 2023/941 K., it was emphasized that issues such as "the manner of committing the crime, ... the severity of the damage or danger caused, the severity of the defendant's fault based on intent..." will be taken into consideration when determining the sentence by departing from the lower limit. In the decision numbered 2012/21791 E., 2013/27991 K., it was stated that "the amount of money seized, the intensity of intent and the way the crime was committed" and "the variety and number of documents can be taken into consideration in determining the basic penalty in accordance with Article 61 of the Turkish Penal Code ".
  4. Chain Crime (TCK Article 43): If the crime is committed against more than one person at different times or against the same person at different times with the decision to commit the same crime, the penalty may be increased. However, since the crime of counterfeiting money is "one of the continuous (continuous) crimes", it has been stated that the acts committed until the legal interruption occurs in the indictment will constitute a single crime and the provisions of chain crimes cannot always be applied ( Example : 2011/6709 E., 2012/24740 K.). In the decision numbered 2024/23927 E., 2024/9762 K. , the application of the provisions of chain crimes was found unlawful by the Court of Cassation.
  5. Incitement: In the decision numbered 2021/9754 E., 2023/9867 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was stated that the situation of the defendant "being understood to have incited a minor ... in the circulation of counterfeit money without appeal" could be a reason to increase the sentence (however, since there was no appeal against it, no reason for reversal was given).
  1. Mitigating Factors (and Favorable Rulings)
    • Discretionary Reduction (TCK Article 62): The court may reduce the sentence by taking into consideration the defendant's past, social relations, behavior after the act and during the trial, and possible effects of the sentence on the future. It is seen that this reduction is applied in many decisions ( e.g. 2023/2103 E., 2024/1905 K.; General Criminal Assembly 2016/1435 E.).
    • Active Remorse: In the decision numbered 2024/16507 E., 2024/9903 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, the sentence given to the defendant ... for "being a member of an organization established for the purpose of committing a crime was reduced in accordance with Article 221/4 of the Turkish Penal Code." This appears as a mitigating factor especially in organized crimes.
    • Acquired Rights Principle: In retrials held after reversal, the previous decisions in favor of the defendant (such as a lower sentence or a postponement decision) are preserved. ( Example : 2024/23927 E., 2024/9762 K.; 2022/2938 E., 2024/1459 K.; 2020/6116 E., 2020/19658 K.)
    • Minority: According to Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code, situations such as the inability to apply deprivation of rights due to minorhood are provisions in favor (2021/11182 E., 2021/18073 K.).
    • Favorable Application of Law: The application of the provisions of the law that came into force after the date of the crime and are in favor of the defendant.
  1. Matters to be Considered in the Trial

The Supreme Court decisions emphasize that the following points should be taken into consideration in the prosecution of counterfeiting crimes:

  1. Complete Collection and Evaluation of Evidence:
    • Expert Report (Central Bank Report): It is mandatory to obtain an expert report from the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey or relevant units on whether the money in question is counterfeit and whether it is capable of deception (seduction). In the decision numbered 2021/5079 E., 2023/8076 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was stated that "an examination and evaluation report should be obtained from the Counterfeit Banknote and Cash Inspection Commission of the General Directorate of the Banknote Printing House of the Republic of Turkey ... or the provincial unit" and that it is unlawful to make a decision based on the preliminary report. These reports have formed the basis of the decision in many decisions ( e.g. 2021/8390 E.; 2023/3136 E.; 2024/20722 E.).
    • Witness and Victim Statements: They are important for the clarification of the incident ( eg : 2023/3136 E.).
    • Defendant's Defense and Confession: The defendant's defense and confession, if any, are evaluated together with other evidence ( e.g .: 2021/8390 E.).
    • Other Evidence: All kinds of evidence such as crime scene investigation reports, search and seizure reports, identification reports, camera recordings (CD review report) must be meticulously collected and evaluated ( e.g .: 2021/8390 E.; 2024/20722 E.).
    • Benefit of Doubt Principle for the Defendant: In order to be convicted , it is necessary to prove that the crime was committed by the defendant with clear, convincing and unambiguous evidence. In its decision numbered 2010/156 E., 2010/225 K. of the General Assembly of Criminal Court of Cassation, it was stated that "Incidents and allegations whose occurrence is suspicious and not fully clarified cannot be interpreted against the defendant and a verdict of conviction cannot be established ." Similarly, in its decision numbered 2018/1428 E., 2019/14040 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, it was found unlawful to convict a defendant instead of acquit him on the grounds that "there is no sufficient, clear, convincing and unambiguous evidence to convict him . "
  2. Compliance with Procedural Provisions:
    • No Restriction on the Right to Defense: Procedural safeguards such as the right of the defendant to be present at the hearing, being reminded of his rights during his interrogation, and granting additional defense rights must be observed. In the decision numbered 2021/3520 E., 2023/4080 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, the failure to have the defendant present at the last session was considered as a restriction on the right to defense and was made a reason for reversal. In the decision numbered 2018/10211 E., 2019/40 K., it was stated that additional defense rights should be granted.
    • Proper Notification of the Reasoned Decision: The parties must be notified of the reasoned decision in due form, and their right to appeal must be ensured (2015/14199 E.).
    • Checking the Power of Attorney: It should be investigated whether the participating attorney is authorized and whether he/she has a power of attorney (2015/14199 E.).
    • Death of the Defendant: In case the defendant dies during the trial or before the verdict is final, a decision should be made to drop the public lawsuit (TCK Art. 64) ( Example : 2021/8390 E.; 2020/14905 E.).
  3. Prevention of Repeated Punishment:
    • Uninterrupted Crimes and Combining Cases: Since the crime of counterfeiting money is one of the uninterrupted (continuous) crimes, a legal break occurs with the preparation of the indictment. In order to prevent the defendant from being punished repeatedly, it should be investigated whether there are other cases or investigations opened against the same defendant, and if there are, the cases should be combined or the relevant evidence should be added to the file. This issue has been emphasized in the decisions of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals numbered 2020/19426 E., 2023/941 K.; 2024/20722 E., 2024/7925 K. and 2021/7997 E., 2023/10383 K.
  4. Correct Determination of Criminal Nature and Applicable Law Articles:
    • Correct determination of which paragraph of TCK 197 article the act complies with ( e.g. 197/1, 197/3).
    • Correctly establishing the relationship with other crimes such as fraud. In the decision numbered 2013/12802 E., 2013/23021 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it was stated that "fraudulent acts and the act of putting counterfeit money into circulation constitute the crime of counterfeiting money as a whole" and it was decided that there was no need to impose a penalty for fraud.
    • Correct and reasoned application of relevant articles of the Turkish Penal Code such as 50 (optional sanctions), 51 (postponement), 52 (judicial fine), 53 (deprivation of rights), 58 (recurrence), 62 (discretionary reduction). In the decision numbered 2011/9791 E., 2012/37482 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, the determination of the judicial fine above the lower limit while the basic prison sentence was determined was seen as a contradiction and was corrected.
  5. Competent Court: The court competent to try the crime of counterfeiting money is usually the High Criminal Court, taking into account the upper limit of the prison sentence (Law No. 5235, Article 12). In the decisions of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, numbered 2019/23738 E., 2022/18483 K. and 2019/19514 E., 2022/13670 K., it is stated that the Criminal Court of First Instance should decide on lack of jurisdiction.
  6. Confiscation: It is necessary to decide to confiscate the counterfeit money involved in the crime in accordance with Article 54 of the TCK and then send it to the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey in accordance with the relevant regulation. ( Example : 2021/7374 E.; General Criminal Assembly 2016/1435 E.; 2018/8589 E.)
  7. Respect for Acquired Rights: In post-overturning trials, attention should be paid to the principle of preserving previous judgments in favor of the defendant. ( Example : 2024/23927 E.; 2022/2938 E.)
  8. Compensation of the Victim's Damages: In the decision numbered 2022/2086 E., 2024/2018 K. of the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it is stated that "the goods taken from the victim ... and the damage caused to the victim should be determined and returned to the victim" .

Examination

When the presented Court of Cassation decisions are examined, it is seen that the crime of counterfeiting money is considered a serious threat to the economic order of society and that the Court of Cassation has a meticulous approach in combating this crime. The most important elements that stand out in the decisions are that the counterfeit money has the "capability to deceive", the perpetrator acts "intentionally" and the trial is based on "absolute, convincing and conclusive evidence that is beyond all doubt".

Evidence assessment, especially expert reports to be obtained from the Central Bank, constitute the cornerstone of the trial. In terms of procedural economy and the establishment of justice, the consolidation of cases and the consideration of the nature of the continuous crime are frequently emphasized in order to prevent repeated trials. The protection of the defendant's right to defense and the implementation of favorable provisions are other important issues that the Supreme Court of Appeals focuses on. Within the framework of the principle of individualization of punishment, factors such as the manner in which the crime was committed, the role of the perpetrator, and the damage caused are effective in determining the basic sentence. While situations such as repetition and organized crime aggravate the penalty, reasons such as discretionary reduction and, in some cases, effective remorse can reduce the penalty.

Conclusion

The crime of counterfeiting money is a serious crime defined in Article 197 of the Turkish Penal Code, which includes the production, importation into the country, transportation, storage or circulation of counterfeit money. The penalty is imprisonment from two to twelve years and a judicial fine of up to ten thousand days. Factors such as organized crime, recurrence, and intensity of intent to commit the crime may increase the penalty; while discretionary reductions and effective repentance may have a reducing effect.

In the trial, it is of great importance to determine the deceptive capacity of the money involved in the crime with an expert report, to reveal the intent of the perpetrator, to collect the evidence completely and evaluate it beyond doubt, to ensure the right to defense, to prevent repeated punishment and to meticulously comply with the procedural rules. The decisions of the Court of Cassation are guiding in the trials related to this crime, both to reveal the material truth and to ensure a fair trial process.

🔖Tags: counterfeit money crime currency counterfeiting law fake money punishment Turkish Penal Code counterfeiting using fake money legal penalty
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Bir yanıt yazın

E-posta adresiniz yayınlanmayacak. Gerekli alanlar * ile işaretlenmişlerdir

Scroll to Top