Legal Consequences of Unauthorized Contract Alteration
Case Summaries for Legal Practice and Academic Reference
1. Alteration of Loan Amount without Written Evidence
Mr. Dam originally signed a loan agreement for 5,000 Baht. Subsequently, Mr. Daeng altered the amount to 8,000 Baht by crossing out the original figure and inserting a new amount without obtaining Mr. Dam’s signature to confirm the amendment. Under Section 653 of the Civil and Commercial Code and Supreme Court Judgment No. 326/2517, Mr. Dam is liable only for the original 5,000 Baht. The additional 3,000 Baht is unenforceable due to lack of written evidence signed by the debtor.
2. Unauthorized Use of Deposited Vehicle
A garage employee used a customer’s deposited vehicle without permission, intending to return it later. Such conduct constitutes theft, as the taking was dishonest and without consent. This is consistent with Supreme Court Judgment No. 1212/2514 under the Penal Code provisions on theft.
3. Animal Trespass and Criminal Liability
The owner who negligently allows livestock to trespass may incur liability under Section 395 of the Penal Code. However, shooting the animal to protect property may exceed lawful defense and constitute damage to property under Sections 358 and 69. If the shooter later appropriates the carcass dishonestly, this constitutes theft.
4. Assault Followed by Staging Suicide
Where an assailant renders a victim unconscious and subsequently stages a hanging, resulting in actual death, criminal liability arises for homicide. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1395/2518 supports classification as unlawful killing.
5. Price Tag Switching in Retail Transaction
Switching price tags to deceive a seller constitutes fraud under the Penal Code. Even if payment is made at the altered price, the act involves misrepresentation intended to cause wrongful gain.