Fraud Prosecution: A Comparative Study of Three Legal Systems

This report provides a comparative analysis of fraud laws and prosecution within three distinct legal systems: Japan (civil law), Singapore (common law), and Vatican City (religious law). The scenario involves an employee accused of defrauding their employer of $1.8 million over four years through the creation of 1,500 fraudulent invoices. The report examines how each jurisdiction would approach the prosecution of this case, including the relevant legal provisions, potential charges, and possible sentences. In Japan, the analysis focuses on the Penal Code and Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, highlighting the elements of fraud, breach of trust, and misappropriation. In Singapore, the Penal Code, particularly sections related to fraudulent misuse of property and criminal breach of trust, is examined. For Vatican City, the report considers the application of Italian Criminal Code provisions and the influence of the religious legal system. The report concludes by comparing the effectiveness and reliability of each legal system in addressing fraud, with a focus on civil, common, and religious law frameworks.

Running Head: Fraud Laws: 1
Fraud laws in Japan, Singapore, and Vatican City
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation

Fraud laws
2
The Civil Law System in Japan
A civil law system refers to a type of legal system whereby the laws are codified to
act as the core source of law (Nottage, 2018). Japan has a civil legal system with several
legislation provisions. The accused’s actions against his employer fall under corporate fraud.
The Japanese civil law system provides legislation that is relevant to corporate fraud. The
regulatory provisions are:
Penal Code
The Japanese penal code contains laws and regulations on fraud (corporate fraud),
misappropriation of funds, and theft. Article 246 of the penal code describes fraud as the act
of obtaining property from another person fraudulently; this act is a crime. Attempting to
defraud a person of their property is also an offence that is punishable by imprisonment up to
10 years with hard labour. Article 247 outlines the offence of special and general breach of
trust. The crime of breach of trust occurs when a person tasked with taking of another’s
affairs, in breach of his/her own duties and inflicting damage to another’s property, does
something that is regarded as misconduct. The crime is punishable by up to 5 years in jail
with labour, or a fine of 500,000 Japanese Yen.
Article 253 of the penal code defines misappropriation (misuse of funds in the course
of undertaking business activities). The crime of misappropriation involves embezzlement of
another person’s property during the conduction of business activities. Transgression by
employees can also fall under misappropriation. Misappropriation as an offense attracts a 10-
year imprisonment sentence with labour.

Fraud laws
3
Financial Instruments and Exchange Act
FIEA defines the requirements for an appropriate revelation of commercial affairs and
also prohibits misconduct relating to securities transactions. Civil law in Japan provides
special needs for the breach of FIEA rules. Articles 157, 158, 158, and 197 of FIEA outline
the offense of misconduct relating to securities transactions. The crime consists of the use of
illegal ways to secure transactions. The illegal means that could be used are false statements,
fraudulent acts, and propagating rumours. The offense attracts a sentence of up to 5 or 10
years, and/or a fine of 5 or 10 million Japanese yen depending on the severity of the act.
The crimes listed by the Japanese legislation require intent and motive beyond a
reasonable doubt to qualify as punishable. The employee had authorized illegal services
totalling 1.8 million dollars for up to 4 years. This indicates that the employee has always had
the intent to defraud his employer. All the crimes listed are relevant to the situation at hand,
but fraud would best suit the accused. The criminal or civil act is evident, and the requisite
intention is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The employer can constitute a civil suit under tort against the employee. The tort of
violation of accountability is present in the employee’s fraudulent acts. The employer will be
awarded damages as a result of the employee’s deeds. Moreover, a criminal proceeding will
guarantee the employee a sentence of up to 10 years of imprisonment with labour.
Common Law System in Singapore
Singapore’s legal system derives its laws from the English Common Law. The main
areas include administrative law, equity and trust law, tort law, property law, and the law of
contract (Neo, 2016). These areas are often influenced by decisions made by the judge
majorly because they involve awarding of damages at the judge’s discretion. Decisions made

Fraud laws
4
by the judges are not codified; for instance, no statute mentions the specific amount of
damage to be offered to a plaintiff. However, Singapore has a penal code that deals with
fraudulent acts.
The employee’s act against his employer would amount to fraud according to the
Singapore common law system. The provisions for fraud fall under:
The Penal Code
Section 403 defines the fraudulent misuse of property. Converting a person’s movable
property and making use of it amounts to misappropriation. However, the employee’s acts do
not constitute misappropriation. Section 405 describes the criminal breach of trust whereby
someone dishonestly misappropriates another’s property that he or she was entrusted to look
after. This section is relevant to the accused’s case. However, section 423 relates to the
employees' actions. According to section 423, signing or executing a transfer dishonestly
amounts to the crime of fraudulent execution of transfers.
The employee signed 1500 invoices that were used to defraud 1.8 million dollars from
the employer. The employee’s act of executing the transfer was dishonest and amounted to
fraud. The accused had the intent to defraud his employer since the act had continued for 4
years. The employee faces two years imprisonment, and/or a fine for fraudulently authorizing
the payment of 1500 invoices totalling 1.8 million dollars to benefit him.
Vatican City’s Religious Law System
Vatican City has fundamental laws that are propagated by the pope. Unlike other
nations, Vatican City does not have laid down procedures for criminal acts. The state uses the
Code of Penal Procedure to determine case brought before tribunals. The legal system in

Fraud laws
5
Vatican City is religious in nature. The nation abolished capital punishment in 1969 and does
not have prisons. The state sometimes relies on the Lateran Treaty with Italy to punish
criminal offenders (Li & Ge, 2017).
In this case study, the accused might have been asked to pay the court fees and held in
the Vatican cells or sent to Italy for trial. The former would guarantee a pardon by the pope
and a minimum imprisonment sentence. Article 640 of the Italian Criminal Code (ICC)
provides for an imprisonment term of between 6 months to 3 years for anyone who engages
in fraud. A civil suit courtesy of the Italian laws would ensure that the employer is paid for
the loss incurred.
Conclusion
The Vatican City legal system is not as comprehensive compared to Japan and
Singapore. Civil and common law systems are known to be the most reliable legal systems
(Ghanbari, Mohseni & Nassiran, 2016). The religious law system is not stable on its own and
in most cases, the criminal offender is acquitted.

Fraud laws
6
References
Statutes
Act No. 45 of 1907 Japanese Penal Code.
Financial Instruments and Exchange Act of 2006.
Singapore Penal Code
Others
Ghanbari, N., Mohseni, H., & Nassiran, D. (2016). Comparative Study of Civil Procedure in
Common Law and Civil Law Systems. J. Pol. & L., 9, 267.
Italian Penal Code (approved by Royal Decree No. 1398 of October 19, 1930, as amended up
to Legislative Decree No. 63 of May 11, 2018)
Li, Z., & Ge, Y. (2017, May). Contemporary Vatican International Identity's influence of
construction and communication. In 3rd International Symposium on Social Science
(ISSS 2017). Atlantis Press.
Neo, J. L. (Ed.). (2016). Constitutional Interpretation in Singapore: Theory and Practice.
Routledge.
Nottage, L. R. (2018). The Development of Comparative Law in Japan. The Oxford
Handbook of Comparative Law'. 2nd ed., OUP. (Forthcoming).