Breach of Trust in Turkey: TCK 155 Criminal Liability

Breach of trust in Turkey, codified under Article 155 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), represents one of the most under-appreciated yet professionally devastating criminal exposures confronting corporate executives, board members, and high-net-worth principals operating within Turkish jurisdiction. From a managing director's diversion of company funds into a personal account to a trustee's unauthorized disposal of assets entrusted to their custody, the criminal architecture established by TCK 155 transforms what many treat as commercial disputes or civil claims into prosecutorial files capable of producing imprisonment of six months to two years and a judicial fine — and, where the qualified form applies, one to seven years and a judicial fine of up to 3,000 days.

For multinational corporations operating Turkish subsidiaries, foreign investors holding shares in Turkish joint ventures, and high-net-worth individuals entrusting Turkish counsel, custodians, or family-office personnel with assets, the practical implications are substantial. Unlike embezzlement (zimmet, TCK 247), which applies only to public officials (kamu görevlisi), TCK 155 reaches directly into the private commercial and fiduciary sphere — capturing the agent, the consignee, the trustee, the corporate executive, and any person who, having been given possession of another's property to keep it or to use it in a particular way, disposes of it outside that purpose. The threshold for criminal exposure is lower than many international clients anticipate, and the choices made at the early investigation stage, including whether and when the loss is made good (TCK 168, below), shape how a criminal defense strategy in Istanbul can resolve the matter.

Key Takeaways

• TCK 155 punishes a person who, having been given possession of another's property to keep it or to use it in a particular way, disposes of it outside the purpose of that handover or denies the handover; the basic form carries six months to two years' imprisonment and a judicial fine, while the qualified form (property handed over in a profession or art, a trade or service relationship, or by virtue of authority to manage another's property) carries one to seven years and a judicial fine of up to 3,000 days. Since Law No. 7571 of 24 December 2025, the penalty is doubled where the property is a motorised land, sea or air vehicle (TCK 155(3)).

• The basic offense is prosecuted upon complaint (şikayete bağlı) with a six-month complaint period running from the day the victim knows or learns of the act and who the perpetrator is; if no complaint is made in time, no investigation or prosecution can be conducted (TCK 73(1)–(2)).

• Foreign investors, joint-venture partners, and corporate principals can be both perpetrators (where they exceed authority over entrusted assets) and victims (where Turkish counterparties divert funds, securities, or movable property they were obligated to hold for a defined purpose).

• Civil and criminal proceedings can run in parallel: a TCK 155 prosecution does not displace the right to pursue compensation under the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK 49) or to seek interim attachment (ihtiyati haciz) under Article 257 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK).

• Under the effective remorse (etkin pişmanlık) rule in TCK 168, returning the property or fully compensating the loss before the prosecution phase begins reduces the sentence by up to two-thirds, and after it begins but before judgment by up to one-half; partial restitution requires the victim's consent.

Legal Architecture of TCK 155 — What the Statute Actually Criminalizes

The Core Elements of Breach of Trust

TCK 155 has three constituent elements that the prosecution must establish. First, possession of property belonging to another must have been transferred to the perpetrator to keep it or to use it in a particular way — for example under agency, deposit, mandate, leasing, consignment, or any other arrangement transferring possession for a defined purpose. Second, the perpetrator must dispose of the property outside the purpose of that transfer — by retaining, selling, transferring, consuming or converting it — or deny that the transfer took place. Third, the disposal must be for the perpetrator's own benefit or for the benefit of another. Negligent mismanagement of entrusted assets, however damaging, does not reach the criminal threshold: negligent acts are punishable only where the law expressly says so (TCK 22(1)), and TCK 155 requires intent (kast), which TCK 21(1) defines as knowingly and willingly realising the elements of the offence.

Distinction From Adjacent Crimes

TCK 155 is often confused with embezzlement (TCK 247), fraud (TCK 157, with qualified forms in TCK 158), and document forgery (TCK 204). The decisive distinction is the underlying legal relationship. Embezzlement under TCK 247 applies only to public officials; fraud under TCK 157 requires deceiving a person by fraudulent conduct to obtain a benefit to that person's or another's detriment; forgery requires producing a false document, altering a genuine one so as to deceive, or using a false one. TCK 155 captures the situation where the relationship of trust is genuine and the document is authentic — but the holder of the property breaches the purpose for which it was received. As we examined in our guide to forgery and document fraud under TCK 204-212, one set of facts can raise more than one offence, and where a false document is used to commit another offence, TCK 212 requires separate sentences for the forgery and for that offence.

Qualified Breach of Trust — The Aggravating Circumstances

The qualified form in TCK 155(2) raises the range from six months to two years to one to seven years' imprisonment and a judicial fine of up to 3,000 days where the offence concerns property deposited and delivered by reason of a profession or art, a trade or service relationship, or — whatever its source — the authority to manage another person's property. Unlike the basic form, the qualified form is not complaint-based. TCK 155(3), added by Law No. 7571 of 24 December 2025, doubles the penalty under either paragraph where the property is a motorised land, sea or air vehicle.

For corporate executives, board members, and C-level officers of Turkish subsidiaries, the qualified form is the one to examine first where company funds and inventory reach them by virtue of their authority to manage the company's property. Where that is established, a managing director's diversion of company funds, a CFO's diversion of treasury balances, or a general manager's unauthorized disposal of corporate inventory falls under TCK 155(2) rather than the basic form — meaning a range of one to seven years. The same paragraph covers property handed over in a professional or service relationship, such as client money held by a lawyer or an accountant, or funds given to a broker for a specific purchase.

Common questions about criminal defence in Turkey

Is breach of trust under TCK 155 a complaint-based offense?

The basic form of TCK 155 is prosecuted upon complaint, with a six-month complaint window from the day the victim knows or learns of the act and who the perpetrator is (TCK 73). The qualified form under TCK 155(2) is prosecuted ex officio by the Public Prosecutor and does not require a complaint. Both forms are nevertheless within the scope of mediation (uzlaştırma) under CMK 253(1)(b)(7), except the vehicle aggravation in TCK 155(3).

Can a foreign national be prosecuted in Turkey under TCK 155?

Yes. Under TCK 8(1), Turkish law applies to offences committed in Turkey regardless of the perpetrator's nationality, and an offence is deemed committed in Turkey where the act is committed wholly or partly in Turkey or its result occurs in Turkey. An offence committed entirely abroad by a foreign national is covered only under the conditions of TCK 12, which include a minimum penalty threshold and the perpetrator's presence in Turkey. Where the perpetrator has left Turkey, requests to foreign states are made under Law No. 6706 on International Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters.

How does TCK 155 differ from civil breach of contract?

A civil breach of contract becomes breach of trust only where possession of property was handed to the perpetrator to keep it or to use it in a particular way and the perpetrator intentionally disposes of it outside that purpose, or denies the handover. Mere non-performance, late performance, or commercially defensible deviation does not reach the criminal threshold. A defence can therefore focus on the absence of intent and on the commercial character of the dispute.

Will restitution stop a TCK 155 prosecution?

It can reduce or end it. Under TCK 168, if the perpetrator personally shows remorse and fully makes good the victim's loss, by returning the property or paying compensation, after the offence but before the prosecution phase begins, the sentence is reduced by up to two-thirds; if this happens after the prosecution phase begins but before judgment, by up to one-half; partial restitution requires the victim's consent. Separately, TCK 155(1) and 155(2) are subject to mediation (uzlaştırma): if a settlement is reached and the suspect performs it in one go, the prosecutor decides not to prosecute (CMK 253(19)), or the court discontinues the case (düşme, CMK 254(2)). For the basic, complaint-based form, withdrawal of the complaint ends the case unless the defendant objects; a withdrawal after the judgment becomes final does not stop enforcement (TCK 73(4) and (6)). The same TCK 168 rules apply to fraud.

Can a Turkish company directly file a TCK 155 complaint against a former executive?

Yes. A company harmed by the offence can file a complaint with the public prosecutor or the police (CMK 158(1)) through its authorised representatives, supported by evidence of the breach, and within the six-month complaint window for the basic form. A civil claim can run alongside: where the act is also a crime with a longer criminal limitation period, that longer period applies to the compensation claim (TBK 72; for joint-stock company liability claims, TTK 560).

Does conviction under TCK 155 disqualify an executive from holding office?

The disqualification comes from the Penal Code. A prison sentence for an intentional offence such as TCK 155 carries, as a legal consequence, a bar on being a manager or auditor of a foundation, association, union, company, cooperative or political party until the sentence has been fully executed (TCK 53(1)(d) and (2)). The bar does not apply where a short prison sentence is suspended (TCK 53(4)). Where the offence was committed by abusing that position, the court also orders a further ban, running after execution, of between half and the full length of the sentence (TCK 53(5)). This has implications for cross-border governance structures and group-wide compliance certifications.

This guide is general information on Turkish law, not legal advice on your own matter. Rules and practice change; check the position before you act.