LIMITS OF DEFAULT AND FRAUD IN LOAN AGREEMENTS

This article examines the legal boundaries between default (breach of contract) and fraud in loan agreements under Indonesian law. Although default is essentially a civil matter arising from contractual relationships, in practice, many cases are criminalized under fraud charges. The study employs a normative juridical method with a doctrinal approach, relying on statutory interpretation of the Indonesian Civil Code (Article 1320) and the Criminal Code (Article 378), supported by legal scholarship, jurisprudence, and case examples. Through qualitative analysis of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, the study highlights how good faith distinguishes default from fraud, while fraudulent intent (mens rea) can shift a contractual breach into a criminal offense. The findings indicate that overcriminalization of contractual disputes risks undermining legal certainty and justice for parties. Therefore, law enforcement officials must carefully assess whether a dispute falls within the civil domain or fulfills the elements of a criminal act. This article concludes that default should remain a civil matter unless deceit and malicious intent are present from the outset of the agreement.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review
Published
2025-09-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56371/jirpl.v6i3.506
Primary Topic
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

LIMITS OF DEFAULT AND FRAUD IN LOAN AGREEMENTS

Andika Aji Wijaya, Eli Tri Kursiswanti
JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
article

LIMITS OF DEFAULT AND FRAUD IN LOAN AGREEMENTS

Andika Aji Wijaya, Eli Tri Kursiswanti
article en

Abstract

This article examines the legal boundaries between default (breach of contract) and fraud in loan agreements under Indonesian law. Although default is essentially a civil matter arising from contractual relationships, in practice, many cases are criminalized under fraud charges. The study employs a normative juridical method with a doctrinal approach, relying on statutory interpretation of the Indonesian Civil Code (Article 1320) and the Criminal Code (Article 378), supported by legal scholarship, jurisprudence, and case examples. Through qualitative analysis of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, the study highlights how good faith distinguishes default from fraud, while fraudulent intent (mens rea) can shift a contractual breach into a criminal offense. The findings indicate that overcriminalization of contractual disputes risks undermining legal certainty and justice for parties. Therefore, law enforcement officials must carefully assess whether a dispute falls within the civil domain or fulfills the elements of a criminal act. This article concludes that default should remain a civil matter unless deceit and malicious intent are present from the outset of the agreement.

JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy ReviewVol. 6(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

LIMITS OF DEFAULT AND FRAUD IN LOAN AGREEMENTS — Andika Aji Wijaya, Eli Tri Kursiswanti · JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS