Bangkok Legal Service

Ms. Subin Mae Kha (Market Seller) sold goods at a fresh market. She owed a share debt to Ms. Hatairat since the beginning of the year 2547, amounting to 5,000 baht, without a contract or document. When Ms. Hatairat demanded payment, Ms. Subin repeatedly postponed payment, and Mr. Sompong visited Ms. Subin’s residence and threatened, stating, “If you do not pay Ms. Hatairat’s debt, you will be abducted for sure.” Mr. Sompong then instructed the preparation of an acknowledgment of debt and a loan agreement. Ms. Subin feared this due to her understanding that Mr. Sompong would abduct and kill her, and therefore, she filled in the text and signed the acknowledgment of debt.

Furthermore, Mr. Sompong stated to Ms. Subin that she should bring the money as stipulated in the acknowledgment of debt, and Mr. Sompong demanded that she pay 5,000 baht in full within one month, and continued to threaten, stating, “If you do not bring the money as agreed, I will carry out my words and will not guarantee your safety.” Subsequently, before the expiration of one month, Mr. Sompong threatened Ms. Subin, who then went to the police station and reported the matter to the police. The police, having planned and apprehended Mr. Sompong while Ms. Subin was delivering the money to him, as follows: to determine whether Mr. Sompong and Ms. Hatairat are liable for any offenses, and for what reasons.

Answer: The act of threatening Ms. Subin initially, causing her to be frightened, and her subsequent willingness to provide benefits to Mr. Sompong in the form of assets, which was completed after she was coerced, constitutes a crime of coercion, pursuant to the Penal Code, Section [UNCLEAR] (regarding coercion). The fact that Ms. Subin obtained a loan from Mr. Sompong without a contract does not negate the coercion, as the threat induced her to provide the assets. The act of seizing the assets was a crime of robbery, pursuant to the Penal Code, Section [UNCLEAR]. Mr. Sompong repeated the threat in close proximity to the first threat, which was not an independent act (8 points). Ms. Hatairat is not liable for any offenses or jointly liable with Mr. Sompong (2 points).

The father of Mr. Ek loaned Mr. Tok 3,600,000 baht.