<![CDATA[This study aims to analyze how substantive criminal law was applied to the crime of continuing fraud in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin and the legal reasoning of the panel of judges in rendering their decision on the crime of continuing fraud in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin. Using a normative research method, the findings of the study indicate that the application of substantive criminal law in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin was in accordance with Article 378 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 64(1) of the Criminal Code. The Panel of Judges successfully established all elements of the continuing offense of fraud based on the facts presented at trial and admissible evidence in accordance with Articles 183 and 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application of the concept of a continuing offense (voortgezette handeling) was also appropriate because the defendant’s acts were committed with a single intent, using the same modus operandi, against the same victim, and within a short span of time. The Panel of Judges’ legal reasoning has satisfied both legal and non-legal aspects. From a legal standpoint, the verdict is based on the proof of the elements of the criminal offense and the application of legal provisions consistent with the theories of proof and criminal liability. From a non-legal standpoint, the Panel of Judges considered the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the defendant as well as the purpose of criminal punishment, ensuring that the verdict reflects legal certainty, justice, and public interest.]]>
