Petty taking under section 141 StGB: Low-value item, hardship and thoughtlessness

Section 141(1) StGB requires an item of low value. The item must be taken from another person or appropriated by the perpetrator or a third party. The provision also requires a special reason: hardship, thoughtlessness or a desire for the item.

The offence refers to several property offences that would apply without this special rule. These include theft, embezzlement, misappropriation and permanent deprivation of property. The conduct must therefore first be assigned to a basic offence.

Section 141 StGB applies only if none of the expressly listed exclusions is present. These include the cases referred to in sections 129, 131, 138(2) and (3), and 140 StGB. A low value does not remove the need for this examination.

Section 141 StGB does not state a fixed euro amount. Whether an item has low value depends on the circumstances of the individual case and the legal assessment at the time of the act. The price alone therefore does not always answer the question.

The assessment may consider the objective value, the condition of the item and the precise circumstances of the taking. Where several items are involved, it may also matter whether they form one object of the act or have to be assessed separately. A general figure from older cases should not be adopted without checking the case.

The defence should secure receipts, market value, condition and any special features of the item. Particularly at the boundary between sections 141 and 127 StGB, the valuation can change the legal classification.

Hardship describes a personal emergency that caused the act. The cause and weight of that situation must be understandable in the individual case. General financial difficulty does not automatically establish the required connection with the taking.

Thoughtlessness points to a spontaneous and unconsidered act. The circumstances, the short decision period and the absence of planning are relevant. The term does not replace an examination of intent and cannot be inferred from later regret alone.

A desire for the item concerns a personal urge to have it. Here too, the actual reason for the act matters. The reason must be established alongside the low value and the basic property offence.

Section 141(3) StGB provides that a person is not punished for an act against a spouse, registered partner, relative in the direct line, brother or sister. The provision expressly identifies the relevant relationships.

For another family member, section 141(3) StGB additionally requires that the parties live in the same household. The actual circumstances at the time of the act are decisive. A loose family relationship is insufficient for this version of the rule.

The family-member rule is separate from the injured person's authorisation under section 141(2) StGB. The two questions concern different requirements and should be examined separately on the basis of the file.

Section 127 StGB concerns taking another person's movable item with the intent to obtain an unlawful benefit for the perpetrator or a third party through appropriation. For section 141 StGB, the low value and one of the three special reasons must also be established. If an element of the special rule is missing, section 127 StGB or another offence remains to be examined.

Embezzlement under section 133 StGB concerns an entrusted item. Misappropriation under section 134 StGB and permanent deprivation of property under section 135 StGB have their own requirements. The exclusions named in section 141(1) StGB also have to be considered.

The distinction affects the penalty, the ability to prosecute and the defence strategy. Returning the item may matter for the further disposal and the assessment of damage. It does not replace a legal examination of the offence and the procedural position.