<![CDATA[Abstract. Fraud committed by bank directors undermines the principle of trust underlying the banking business, as illustrated by the case of PT BPR Pancadana in Depok, where a director colluded with two employees to disburse fictitious deposits detrimental to depositors and to extend fictitious loans detrimental to the bank itself. This research aims to examine the director's liability for fraud detrimental to depositors under banking regulations and for fraud detrimental to the company under the Limited Liability Company Law. The research employs a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical specification, drawing on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials analyzed qualitatively. The findings show that the director breached the principles of trust, prudence, good corporate governance, and fiduciary duty toward depositors, and violated Article 97 of the Company Law by disregarding the duty of care and duty of loyalty toward the bank, precluding reliance on the business judgment rule. It is concluded that liability toward depositors is cumulative, covering administrative, civil, and criminal dimensions, while liability toward the bank is personal and joint and several. The research recommends strengthening internal bank supervision, depositor prudence, and closer OJK oversight of rural banks. Keywords: Directors' Liability, Banking Fraud, Fiduciary Duty, Rural Bank, Limited Liability Company. Abstrak. Fraud yang dilakukan oleh direksi bank mencederai prinsip kepercayaan yang menjadi landasan usaha perbankan, sebagaimana terjadi pada PT BPR Pancadana Depok, di mana seorang direktur bersama dua pegawainya terbukti mencairkan deposito fiktif yang merugikan nasabah sekaligus menciptakan kredit fiktif yang merugikan bank. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji tanggung jawab hukum direksi atas fraud yang merugikan nasabah berdasarkan peraturan di bidang perbankan serta atas fraud yang merugikan bank berdasarkan Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan spesifikasi deskriptif analitis, melalui studi kepustakaan atas bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier yang dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan direksi telah melanggar asas kepercayaan, kehati-hatian, tata kelola perusahaan yang baik, dan fiduciary duty terhadap nasabah, serta melanggar Pasal 97 Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas melalui pengabaian duty of care dan duty of loyalty terhadap bank, sehingga tidak dapat berlindung di balik business judgment rule. Disimpulkan bahwa tanggung jawab direksi terhadap nasabah bersifat kumulatif meliputi tanggung jawab administratif, perdata, dan pidana, sedangkan tanggung jawab terhadap bank bersifat pribadi dan tanggung renteng. Penelitian merekomendasikan penguatan pengawasan internal bank, kehati-hatian nasabah, dan penguatan pengawasan OJK terhadap Bank Perekonomian Rakyat. Kata Kunci: Tanggung Jawab Direksi, Fraud Perbankan, Fiduciary Duty, Bank Perekonomian Rakyat, Perseroan Terbatas.]]>
