Identity Theft and Article 180 – How Such Conduct Is Qualified
Using another person's personal data to obtain property is qualified under Article 180 of the Criminal Code of Georgia – the fraud article. The article defines fraud as the unlawful appropriation of another's property, or the acquisition of a property right, by deception. In identity-theft cases the deception consists in presenting oneself as another person, or acting with another person's documents and data, so that the victim transfers property or a property right. The legal core remains the same: deception in the service of unlawful appropriation.
In legal terms the same two elements are decisive here as in every fraud case – deception and the aim of appropriation. The prosecution must prove that the person used another's identity as the instrument of deception and, through it, appropriated another's property or acquired a property right. The fact of the misuse of identity must be established by evidence in each individual case, and it is on the reliability of that evidence that a lawyer builds the defense position.
What the Defense Examines in Identity Theft Cases
The first question – who used the stolen data and how. In digital-era cases the transfer of and access to data is often distributed among several persons, and it is not always clear from the file who committed the specific act. The prosecution must connect a concrete person with a concrete transaction – that is, prove that it was this person who used the other's identity and this person who obtained the property. If such a connection is not confirmed by evidence, the charge remains unsupported.
The second question – the aim of appropriation. Often the use of another's data is part of a conflict of a different character, and every case must be assessed separately in order to establish whether an intention of unlawful appropriation existed. The third question – the amount of damage: where the prosecution invokes significant damage or a large amount, that circumstance must be substantiated.
Sanctions – Every Part of Article 180 Separately
Article 180 provides for the following penalties, and it is important that each part's sanction be read on its own:
- part 1 – fraud, that is, the unlawful appropriation of another's property or the acquisition of a property right by deception – is punished by a fine, or community service for a term of one hundred and seventy to two hundred hours, or corrective labor for a term of up to two years, or house arrest for a term of one to two years, or imprisonment for a term of two to four years;
- part 2 – the same act committed by a group with prior conspiracy, or having caused significant damage – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of four to seven years;
- part 3 – the same act committed by using an official position, in a large amount, or more than once – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of six to nine years;
- part 4 – the same act committed by an organized group, or by a person twice or more previously convicted of unlawful appropriation of another's property or of extortion – imprisonment for a term of seven to ten years.
The sanction of part 1 starts from a fine, while part 4 provides for imprisonment only. Identity-theft cases that involve more than one victim, or repetition, often proceed under part 2 or part 3 – which means that repetition and group commission are of particular significance in this category of cases. The rules on individualization of punishment are defined by other norms of the Code.
Aggravating Forms – What Makes the Charge More Severe
Part 2 treats as aggravated the commission by a group with prior conspiracy, and the causing of significant damage. Part 3 aggravates liability where the act was committed by using an official position, in a large amount, or more than once. Part 4 concerns an organized group and a person who has twice or more been convicted of unlawful appropriation of another's property or of extortion.
In identity theft cases the theme of repetition is particularly sensitive: repeated use of the same scheme moves the prosecution up to part 3, which significantly increases the penalty. That is why the separate verification of each episode – whether it is substantiated with evidence – is an indispensable step of the defense.
The Victim's and the Accused's Position – Both Sides Need a Lawyer
If your data have been used and you are the victim, a lawyer will help you fix the evidence properly and ensure that the case receives proper attention. If you are in the position of the accused, a lawyer will verify exactly what connection your person has with the specific episodes and whether signs of fraud exist at all. In both situations a timely response is decisive.
Bear in mind: procedural time limits and the rules for collecting evidence are defined by other provisions, and the risk of losing the digital trail always exists – which is why a consultation with a lawyer should take place as early as possible.
How a Defense Lawyer Assists in Identity Fraud Cases
The lawyers of Legal.ge work on criminal cases, including episodes involving the use of digital data. We will assess the correctness of the qualification, the proof of deception and of the aim of appropriation, the separate substantiation of each episode, and will defend your interests at every stage of the proceedings.