Embezzlement lawyers in Barcelona

To establish a crime of misappropriation, the following requirements must be met:

• The perpetrator must initially be the legitimate possessor of the property. In other words, before the crime is committed, the perpetrator legitimately possesses the property.
• That the author has received the asset on deposit, commission, custody or any other title that generates the obligation to return it.
• That the author appropriates, for himself or for a third party, the property that has been delivered to him, or denies having received it.
• That, as a consequence of this appropriation, a third party suffers financial loss.

Article 254 of the Penal Code punishes, with a lesser penalty, cases of appropriation of another’s personal property that do not meet the requirements of Article 253 of the Penal Code.

This modality is usually applied in cases of appropriation of lost or unknown property, or even the appropriation of property received by mistake of the transmitter.

The basic type of crime, provided for in article 253 of the Penal Code, is punishable by the same sentence as for the crime of fraud, which is imprisonment from six months to three years , if the value of the appropriation exceeds 400 euros.

However, if the appropriated property is valued under 400 euros, the penalty is a fine of one to three months . In this case, we are dealing with a minor offense of misappropriation.

Finally, the residual type of misappropriation under Article 254 of the Criminal Code carries a fine of three to six months . In this case, if the value of the appropriation does not exceed 400 euros, the penalty is a fine of one to two months .

The penalty is aggravated, imprisonment from one to six years and a fine of six to twelve months, when any of the following circumstances occur:

• If the appropriated goods are essential, housing or other goods of social utility.

• If the crime is committed by abusing another’s signature, or by removing or concealing a public or official protocol or document.

• When the appropriated assets form part of the artistic, historical, cultural or scientific heritage.

• If the appropriation is especially serious, due to the extent of the damage and the economic situation in which it leaves the victim.

• If the stolen items are valued at more than 50,000 euros, or the crime affects many people.

• When appropriation is committed by abusing the personal relationship between the victim and the perpetrator, or by the latter taking advantage of their business credibility.

• When at the time of committing the crime, the perpetrator has been convicted of at least three crimes included in this Chapter.

Joaquín Sugrañes is a highly specialized criminal lawyer whose goal is to provide excellent criminal defense to all his clients.

If you are facing a problem related to what we have described, call us, discuss your case with us, and we will assess your options for the best criminal defense.

According to Supreme Court doctrine, the distinguishing factor between the crime of misappropriation and that of dishonest administration lies in whether the appropriation of the assets is final or not.

Thus, the permanent disposition of assets to the detriment of their owner constitutes the crime of misappropriation. Conversely, the mere misuse of those assets to the detriment of their owner, but without permanent loss, is subsumed under the crime of dishonest administration.

Only movable property, including money, can be the subject of the crime of misappropriation, but never real estate.

In both cases, we are dealing with property crimes, which are regulated within the same Title of the Penal Code.

The main difference between the two crimes is that, in the crime of misappropriation, the perpetrator is initially the legitimate possessor of the property, by virtue of a contract or agreement that imposes an obligation to subsequently return it, an obligation that is ultimately breached.

On the contrary, in the crime of theft the perpetrator is never the legitimate possessor of the property, but rather directly removes it from the sphere of control of its owner.