<![CDATA[Abstract: There are BUMN assets in the form of land rights that are used as evidence in the Supreme Court Decision Number: 435 PK / Pid.Sus / 2020 that have been transferred without going through the mechanism regulated in the provisions. This study discusses the problem of regulating the transfer of BUMN assets, the judge's considerations in imposing criminal penalties in the form of payment of compensation resulting in the transfer of BUMN assets, and the validity of the transfer of BUMN assets in the form of land rights in the Supreme Court Decision Number: 435 PK / Pid.Sus / 2020. The research method of this study is a normative legal research type supported by empirical data with a statutory regulatory approach and a case approach carried out with a literature study to obtain primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials that will be analyzed qualitatively by drawing conclusions deductively. The Judge's consideration in the Supreme Court Decision Number: 435 PK/Pid.Sus/2020 can be said to be wrong because the object of evidence number 169 in the form of 74 Ha (seventy four hectares) of land is a BUMN asset that has not been written off and transferred according to the provisions of the law. The recommendation of this study is that the BUMN Company is expected to write off BUMN assets that have been granted HGU that has not been extended. Keyword: BUMN Assets, Corruption Crimes, Replacement Money. Abstrak: Terdapat asset BUMN berupa hak atas tanah yang dijadikan barang bukti dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor: 435 PK/Pid.Sus/2020 telah dipindahtangankan tanpa melalui mekanisme yang diatur dalam ketentuan. Penelitian ini membahas permasalahan pengaturan pemindahtanganan asset BUMN, pertimbangan hakim dalam menjatuhkan pidana berupa pembayaran uang pengganti yang mengakibatkan pemindahtanganan asset BUMN, dan keabsahan pemindahtanganan asset BUMN berupa hak atas tanah dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor: 435 PK/Pid.Sus/2020. Metode penelitian penelitian ini berjenis penelitian hukum normatif yang didukung data empiris dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan kasus yang dilakukan dengan studi kepustakaan untuk memperoleh bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier yang akan dianalisis secara kualitatif dengan menarik kesimpulan secara deduktif. Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor: 435 PK/Pid.Sus/2020 dapat dikatakan keliru dikarenakan objek barang bukti nomor 169 berupa Tanah seluas 74 Ha (tujuh puluh empat hektar) merupakan aset BUMN yang belum dilakukan penghapusbukuan dan pemindahtanganan asset sesuai ketentuan undang-undang. Rekomendasi penelitian ini adalah diharapkan agar pihak Perusahaan BUMN melakukan penghapusbukuan terhadap aset BUMN yang diberikan HGU yang sudah tidak diperpanjang. Kata kunci: Aset BUMN, Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Uang Pengganti.]]>
