Section 352 — Misappropriation of property
English translation
Whoever, being in possession of property belonging to another person, or of which another person is a co-owner, dishonestly converts that property to himself or to a third person, commits the offence of misappropriation, and shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years, or a fine not exceeding sixty thousand baht, or both.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 352 is the basic misappropriation offence. Its elements are: the offender is in possession of property, the property belongs to another or is jointly owned, and he dishonestly converts it to himself or a third person. The decisive feature is that the offender already lawfully holds the property, which separates misappropriation from theft under Section 334, where the offender takes property out of another's possession. Aggravated forms follow in Section 354 where the possessor is a court-appointed or testamentary administrator or a person in a business the public trusts, and the whole chapter is compoundable under Section 356. Courts sometimes reclassify a charge from theft to misappropriation, or the reverse, according to whether possession had already passed to the accused.
Why this matters in practice
Two points dominate practice. First, because misappropriation is compoundable under Section 356, the injured party must complain within three months of learning the offence and the offender, so delay can be fatal to the case. Second, the theft or misappropriation line matters for both charge and defence: if the accused was lawfully entrusted with the property, the correct charge is misappropriation, not theft, and the maximum penalty is three years. Restitution is commonly ordered, and where the property is jointly owned the injured co-owner may recover only his share. Employees, agents, and business partners are the typical defendants; take advice on dishonesty and misappropriation offences in Thailand early.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 809/2568 (2025)
Conduct originally charged as theft can be convicted as misappropriation under Section 352 paragraph one where the accused already held the property, and a first offender may receive a suspended sentence.
The trial court acquitted, but the Court of Appeal reversed and convicted the defendant of misappropriation under Section 352 paragraph one, imposing three months imprisonment and a 30,000 baht fine, reduced by one third for useful testimony, with the prison term suspended for one year as he had no prior record.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3672/2568 (2025)
Where an employee entrusted with the employer's funds dishonestly takes them, the conduct is misappropriation under Section 352 paragraph one rather than theft, because possession had lawfully passed to the accused.
The trial court had convicted under the theft provisions, but the Court of Appeal amended the conviction to misappropriation under Section 352 paragraph one and sentenced the defendant to three years, reduced by one third to two years, with an order to return over four million baht to the injured company.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between misappropriation and theft?
In misappropriation the offender already lawfully holds the property and then dishonestly keeps it, while theft under Section 334 is taking property out of someone else's possession. The dividing line is whether possession had already passed to the accused.
Is misappropriation compoundable?
Yes. Section 356 makes the misappropriation chapter compoundable, so the case can be settled and withdrawn, but the injured party must complain within three months of knowing the offence and offender.
What is the penalty for misappropriation?
Up to three years imprisonment, a fine up to sixty thousand baht, or both. Courts also commonly order the offender to return or pay for the property.