Theft under Section 127 StGB in Austria: taking another movable thing, intent to appropriate, penalty range, distinctions and first steps.
Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt
Your lawyer for criminal defence
Criminal proceedings are a matter of trust. One lawyer who walks with you from the first consultation through to the trial, everything from one hand.
A theft allegation is often a person’s first contact with Austrian criminal procedure. The issue is not only whether an object was taken, but whether there was intent to appropriate it unlawfully for oneself or a third person. Those points decide whether Section 127 StGB is fulfilled at all.
This article explains, from a legal perspective, the elements of theft, the distinction from embezzlement, misappropriation and handling stolen goods, the role of restitution and active repentance, and the mistakes to avoid after a first summons. It is general information, not advice in an individual case.
The right first response depends on whether a summons exists, whether the object was seized and whether restitution is realistically possible.
You already know you want to send a request? Go straight to the form.
The right first response depends on whether a summons exists, whether the object was seized and whether restitution is realistically possible.
With an allegation under § 127 StGB, the first step is not an instinctive explanation but clarification of the offence, file and evidence. The right to silence applies in full.
From a legal perspective, file access under Section 51 StPO and distinctions from neighbouring offences should be assessed before any statement.
Messages, files, photos, receipts, records and witness information should be preserved in full. Nothing should be deleted, altered or created after the fact.
Digital traces can be decisive and should not be weakened by well-meant corrections.
Depending on the allegation, discontinuation, diversion, restitution, evidence requests or trial preparation may be relevant. The file decides.
Early structure prevents unfavourable statements and missed deadlines.
Many criminal allegations are close to each other. The decisive issue is which element characterises the concrete case and which offence is actually opened.
The correct distinction can change the penalty range, the procedural route and the defence strategy.
Section 127 StGB covers taking another movable thing with the intent to appropriate it unlawfully for oneself or a third person. The objective taking and the inner intent must both be established.
Not every unclear possession situation is theft. If the item was taken by mistake, under an assumed entitlement or without intent to appropriate, the legal picture changes. From a legal perspective, the state of mind is often as important as the outward act.
The basic offence carries imprisonment of up to six months or a fine of up to 360 daily rates. Section 128 StGB provides higher ranges, including where the value exceeds EUR 5,000 or, at more than EUR 300,000, a range from one to ten years.
The value of the object, the exact taking situation and possible aggravating features must therefore be assessed carefully.
Theft is about taking. Embezzlement concerns property that was entrusted to the accused; misappropriation concerns found or mistakenly received property. Handling stolen goods concerns dealing with property that already comes from another person’s offence.
The distinction determines the offence, evidential questions and possible restitution routes.
Do not give a spontaneous statement before the allegation and evidence are known. File access under Section 51 StPO, securing exculpatory material and assessing restitution are the first sensible steps.
It is equally important not to destroy anything and not to influence witnesses. CCTV, receipts, chats and handover situations should be documented early.
The right first response depends on whether a summons exists, whether the object was seized and whether restitution is realistically possible.
| Point | Assessment | Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Theft | Taking another movable thing | Section 127 StGB |
| Embezzlement | Appropriation of entrusted property | Section 133 StGB |
| Misappropriation | Keeping found or mistakenly received property | Section 134 StGB |
| Handling stolen goods | Dealing with property from another person’s offence | Section 164 StGB |
Restitution is not a substitute for defence. Returning an item or paying compensation can matter, but it should be coordinated. In particular, whether active repentance under Section 167 StGB is available has to be assessed first.
The right first response depends on whether a summons exists, whether the object was seized and whether restitution is realistically possible.
Record summons, complaint or measure precisely.
Check evidence and offence before any statement.
Document records, messages and witnesses in an ordered way.
Assess discontinuation, diversion or trial defence.
No. A complaint starts the procedure. Taking, intent, value, evidence and possible diversion all need assessment.
Theft involves taking from another person’s possession. Misappropriation concerns property that came into one’s possession without such taking, for example by finding or mistake.
Restitution can help, but uncoordinated contact with victims or witnesses can create new problems. It should be handled through a clear defence strategy.
Juvenile theft and property damage as a special case.
When property already comes from another offence.
When restitution can have a stronger legal effect.
The general route after a complaint or summons.
In criminal matters every hour counts. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day, earlier in urgent cases.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 660 2407152