Theft, Robbery and Misappropriation – Key Differences and Criminal Liability

Theft, robbery and misappropriation are offences against property, but they differ substantially. The classification depends on how the property came into the perpetrator’s hands, whether force or threats were used and on what basis the person held the property before disposing of it.

What is theft?

Under Article 194(1) of the Bulgarian Criminal Code, theft is the taking of another person’s movable property from their possession without consent and with intent to appropriate it unlawfully. The taking interrupts the previous possession and establishes control by the perpetrator. The property need not belong to the victim; it is enough that it was in the victim’s possession.

When is theft qualified?

Article 195 provides heavier liability in specified circumstances, including breaking or damaging barriers, using a vehicle, technical device or special method, prior agreement between two or more persons, repetition and other statutory cases. The exact qualification depends on the means, method, role of each participant and the law applicable at the time.

What is robbery?

Robbery also involves taking movable property with intent to appropriate it, but force or threats are used. Article 198 also covers cases where a person caught during theft uses force or threats to retain possession of the property, and cases where the victim is rendered unconscious or helpless.

What force or threat is relevant?

Not every conflict turns a taking into robbery. The content and timing of the threat, the physical force used, its connection with the taking and the victim’s perception must be examined against medical documents, recordings, witnesses and other evidence.

What is misappropriation?

In misappropriation, the property is not taken directly from another’s possession. It was already delivered or entrusted to the perpetrator for a particular purpose, and the person later treats it as their own. Official embezzlement under Article 201 concerns property entrusted to an official in that capacity. Article 206 concerns unlawful appropriation of movable property that a person possesses or keeps.

Theft or misappropriation?

The key question is how possession arose. Taking without consent normally points to theft. Where property was lawfully received for storage, use, transport, management or another purpose and was later treated as one’s own, misappropriation may be involved. Breach of contract or non-payment is not automatically a crime; the original basis, subsequent conduct and intent must be assessed.

What must be proved?

ownership and possession of the property;
how and when possession passed to the accused;
whether consent existed and its scope;
whether force or threats were used;
intent to appropriate unlawfully;
the value of the property;
qualified circumstances and each participant’s role.

Does returning the property matter?

Return or replacement may affect the applicable provision and the sentence, but it does not automatically erase an offence already committed. The result depends on the offence, timing and manner of restitution and the other circumstances.

Conclusion

Theft involves taking without consent; robbery involves taking through force or threats; and in misappropriation the perpetrator already holds entrusted property and later treats it as their own. The boundary follows the proven facts, not the label used in the complaint.

This article provides general information. For advice on a specific case, contact attorney Mihail Tomov.