<![CDATA[The ability to distinguish between administrative violations, business risks, and corruption is crucial in the distribution of Kredit Usaha Rakyat (KUR). This study aims to analyze the legal construction of abuse of authority in KUR distribution as a criminal act of corruption, specifically analyzing the judge's considerations in Decision Number 64/Pid.Sus-TPK/2023/PN Medan. Using a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical approach, this research examines primary and secondary legal materials. The results show that the abuse of authority in KUR distribution falls under Article 3 of the Anti-Corruption Law if it involves an intentional deviation from procedures to benefit oneself, others, or a corporation, resulting in state financial loss. Furthermore, the KUR program is fundamentally a state-backed initiative containing subsidies and guarantees, giving it a public law dimension. The judge's ratio decidendi in the studied decision emphasizes the factual evidence of procedural manipulation, fictitious debtor data, and malicious intent, effectively differentiating the act from standard banking credit risks. The perpetrators utilized their internal positions to orchestrate the approval of unqualified credit applications. In conclusion, strict supervision and accurate legal differentiation are essential in handling KUR-related cases, ensuring that risk management in banking is not wrongfully criminalized while maintaining zero tolerance for deliberate state-harming corruption.]]>
