A bank employee who embezzled 20 million dirhams for spending on her boyfriend has been commuted

Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation has heard an appeal by a female employee accused of taking over 20 million dirhams from her bank and spending it on a young man deluded by marriage.

The court ruled that the appeal judgment should be partially amended in terms of the sentence against the accused and corrected by reducing the sentence of imprisonment to two years instead of three years, and upholding the sentence in the fine and restitution section.

The case is due to the admiration of a Gulf girl, who occupies a position in one of the banks operating in the country, one of the bank's customers, which led to the illusion that she was from a very wealthy family to encourage him to marry her, while the latter used her to get expensive money and gifts for him and his family, despite knowing that she was lying And it is not wealthy.

The Public Prosecution has directed the first defendant to exploit her job and seize the right of an amount of AED (20) million owned by her knowledge, to enter the computer system of the bank using the passcode of one of the employees of the bank to submit a request to raise the limit of credit limit, for approval In this way, she was able to seize the bank's funds, while the second accused was charged with possession of funds derived from the crime in question in circumstances which led to the belief that the source of the crime was illegal.

The defendants' confessions showed that she was over 30 years old and did not marry, causing her psychological pain, especially as she wants to marry a handsome, educated person with a distinct personality, pointing out that the young man who deluded her with love (the second defendant) was a client in the bank. Working with him, I recognized him because of a minor problem in his account and helped him to solve.

She pointed out that a relationship began between them after he noticed her fascination with him did not waste time, especially since he was very confident of himself, he told her feelings towards her, pointing out that she knew from the first moment that his feelings towards her is not real, but he confirmed his desire to betroth, which was what She wanted him and waited for him, so I thought that he would drown him with money to get used to a level of well-being, beyond his means, and he could not find a way to maintain that except to link to it.

The accuser asserted that she had deluded the "false lover" from a wealthy family, and in return, the illusion is that he believed her, pointing out that he began to fabricate lies to get them the money embezzled by making an overdraft from the bank where you work, once he says that his brother He will be imprisoned for defaulting on a loan, giving him the value of the loan, and once he comes worried and telling her that his mother caused a car accident and the car is not fully insured, and will remain without a car, prompting her to buy a new car for his mother, another for his sister and a third for his father instead of his old car, In addition to watches and expensive gifts, th Guaranteed travel and shopping trips.

The Court of First Instance had sentenced the first accused to seven years imprisonment, a fine of twenty million and five hundred thousand dirhams, and the second accused to imprisonment for six months and a fine of twenty thousand dirhams, and obliging him to return the amount of 2 million and 230 thousand dirhams to the victim's bank in solidarity with the accused. After the appeal of the accused, the Court of Appeal ruled that the first defendant should be sentenced to three years' imprisonment and upheld the first instance court's ruling for the fine he received, with deducting the amount paid out of the sums sentenced to refund, and the abolition of the sentence of imprisonment The third defendant Ne, and the support of the appellant judgment as spent by him of the fine mentioned in solidarity with the first accused.

The Court of Appeal's ruling was not accepted by the convicted person (the first accused), and she appealed against him. She denied the appeal against the ruling that the material corner of the crime had disappeared because it obtained the money by borrowing and not by seizure, and the absence of the moral element, in addition to requesting to address the medical committee to prepare an explanatory report. However, the court reversed its request, and the court ruled in part to overturn the contested verdict in terms of the punishment it had imposed on the appellant, to correct it and to make the sentence imprisonment for two years and to retain the fine and restitution.