Whoever commits sexual intercourse with a child not over fifteen years of age who is not his or her spouse, whether or not the child consents, shall be punished with imprisonment of five to twenty years and fined of one hundred thousand to four hundred thousand Baht.
If the offence under paragraph one is committed against a child not over thirteen years of age, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment of seven to twenty years and fined of one hundred and forty thousand to four hundred thousand Baht, or imprisonment for life.
If the offence under paragraph one or paragraph two is committed by having or using a firearm or explosive, or jointly committed in the nature of gang rape of a girl or the like act against a boy, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment for life.
Child rapeกระทำชำเราเด็กSexual offenceความผิดเกี่ยวกับเพศConsent no defenceความยินยอมไม่เป็นข้อแก้ตัว
Why This Section Mattersทำไมมาตรานี้จึงสำคัญ
Sexual intercourse with a child not over fifteen is an offence even if the child consents; punishable by 4–20 years and a fine, with heavier penalties where the child is under thirteen or is a descendant/pupil.
Reformed by the Criminal Code Amendment Acts No. 19 (2007) and No. 27 (2019), which restructured the sexual-offence provisions and the definition of rape.
A minor's consent is never a defence; a genuine, reasonable mistake as to age may be argued. Aggravation under §285 (relative/teacher) and §277's weapon/gang limbs materially increases exposure.
The Supreme Court ruled on the scope of 'sexual intercourse' for purposes of statutory rape under Section 277 paragraph 2. The court interpreted the phrase broadly to include various forms of penetration involving sexual organs, anus, or mouth. This decision expanded the understanding of what constitutes the actus reus of sexual offenses against children, foreshadowing the formal definitional expansion in Amendment No. 30 (B.E. 2568).
The Supreme Court ruled on the scope of 'sexual intercourse' for purposes of statutory rape under Section 277 paragraph 2. The court interpreted the phrase broadly to include various forms of penetration involving sexual organs, anus, or mouth. This decision expanded the understanding of what constitutes the actus reus of sexual offenses against children, foreshadowing the formal definitional expansion in Amendment No. 30 (B.E. 2568).
The defendant engaged in sexual intercourse with a girl under fifteen years of age. The defendant claimed the victim consented to the act. The Supreme Court convicted the defendant under Section 277, holding that a minor under the age of fifteen cannot give legally valid consent to sexual intercourse. The legislative purpose of Section 277 is to protect children who, by reason of their age, are deemed incapable of making a fully informed decision regarding sexual acts. Therefore, the consent or willingness of the minor is irrelevant to the commission of the offense. The offense is complete upon the act of sexual intercourse with a person under fifteen, regardless of the circumstances.
The defendant engaged in sexual intercourse with a girl under fifteen years of age. The defendant claimed the victim consented to the act. The Supreme Court convicted the defendant under Section 277, holding that a minor under the age of fifteen cannot give legally valid consent to sexual intercourse. The legislative purpose of Section 277 is to protect children who, by reason of their age, are deemed incapable of making a fully informed decision regarding sexual acts. Therefore, the consent or willingness of the minor is irrelevant to the commission of the offense. The offense is complete upon the act of sexual intercourse with a person under fifteen, regardless of the circumstances.
The court examined criminal conduct involving alleged rape of two victims under 15. The defendant removed clothing and attempted penetration, but physical evidence indicated the act did not achieve full penetration. The court determined the defendant's actions constituted an attempt rather than completed rape. The Supreme Court ruled the prosecution's evidence supported conviction under Section 277(1) rather than the more severe Section 277(2), as the appellate court's conviction exceeded the plaintiff's request.
The court examined criminal conduct involving alleged rape of two victims under 15. The defendant removed clothing and attempted penetration, but physical evidence indicated the act did not achieve full penetration. The court determined the defendant's actions constituted an attempt rather than completed rape. The Supreme Court ruled the prosecution's evidence supported conviction under Section 277(1) rather than the more severe Section 277(2), as the appellate court's conviction exceeded the plaintiff's request.
The defendant was convicted of attempted rape (พยายามข่มขืนกระทำชำเรา). The defendant's actions constituted a single continuous act violating multiple criminal statutes (Sections 276, 277 bis, 297, 364, 365). The Supreme Court corrected the sentencing to impose punishment under the most severe provision per Section 90. This case established the principle that when a sexual assault constitutes multiple offenses in a single continuous act, the heaviest penalty provision applies.
The defendant was convicted of attempted rape (พยายามข่มขืนกระทำชำเรา). The defendant's actions constituted a single continuous act violating multiple criminal statutes (Sections 276, 277 bis, 297, 364, 365). The Supreme Court corrected the sentencing to impose punishment under the most severe provision per Section 90. This case established the principle that when a sexual assault constitutes multiple offenses in a single continuous act, the heaviest penalty provision applies.
What is the age of consent in Thailand?อายุยินยอมในประเทศไทยคือเท่าไร?
Sexual intercourse with a child not over 15 is an offence under Section 277 even if the child consents; the penalty is 4–20 years imprisonment and a fine, higher if the child is under 13.
Are penalties higher if the offender is a relative or teacher?โทษหนักขึ้นไหมหากผู้กระทำเป็นญาติหรือครู?
Yes. Under Section 285 the penalty is increased by one-third where the victim is a descendant, a pupil in the offender's care, or a similar relationship.
Disclaimer: The English translation is unofficial and for informational purposes only. The authoritative text is in Thai as published in the Royal Thai Government Gazette (Ratchakitchanubeksa).ข้อสงวนสิทธิ์: คำแปลภาษาอังกฤษเป็นคำแปลอย่างไม่เป็นทางการ เพื่อวัตถุประสงค์ในการให้ข้อมูลเท่านั้น ข้อความที่เป็นทางการเป็นภาษาไทยตามที่ประกาศในราชกิจจานุเบกษา
