Int. j. econ. manag. soc. sci., Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015. pp.

75-81

TI Journals

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences

www.tijournals.com

ISSN:
2306-7276

Copyright 2015. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

The Investigation of Embezzlement Crime from Criminology and

Statistical Analysis of Its Effective Factors
Ershad Kaviani Mobarakeh*
The faculty member of Mobarakeh Payame Noor University, Law Department, Iran.
*Corresponding author: ershad62@yahoo.com

Keywords

Abstract

Embezzlement
Penal rights
Government employee

Today, committing embezzlement crime by staffs and government employees has been proposed as one of the
major problems of our society and due to its span and committing extent it has led to devastating effects in our
society. If government officials do not perform their administrative tasks as it is ordered and they abuse their
authorities and position, office that is a place to enforce regulations and undertakes the main responsibility to
establish regulation and security in society will lose its credibility and it causes discontent and distrust among
people towards the organization and finally government. The perspective of Iran's lawmakers about this crime
has been towards the intensification of punishment and using the policy of prevention has been completely
neglected. The main purpose of this study is the investigation of embezzlement charges according to
criminology; also, the statistical analysis of effective factors on this crime is based on some employees'
perspective in offices of Mobarakeh. So firstly by studying some carried studies in this field, the theoretical
framework of study, codification and then the significance of effective factors on embezzlement crime were
investigated through data derived from collecting the questionnaire and using statistical analysis of SPSS
software. In the present study, the preference order of effective factors on the occurrence of embezzlement
crime according to employees' perspective was obtained by using paired comparison. T-test and Spearman
correlation test were respectively done to show the significance of hypotheses and the investigation of
relationship between variables; also, the investigation of unequal effect of effective factors on the occurrence of
embezzlement according to employees was done by using Kruskal-Wallis test.

1.

Introduction

Embezzlement in government properties is a kind of criminal acts and it can be said there is no society that is safe and immune from this
criminal act. Also, this crime had been a major problem in our society and due to its span and committing extent it leads to devastating effects in
society, on the other hand, it leads to creating a poisonous atmosphere and a certain skepticism towards the hardworking and great group of
government's employees and officials; because the legal nature of this crime that is done by the government employees and officials and its
occurrence possibility is only imagined by the mentioned group, essentially, it will be based on government's and people's trust and confidence
towards doing tasks by government employees and officials; in fact, their acts that are based on legal task or their acts towards cash, receivables,
shares, drafts, documents, securities or other properties belonging to agencies, organizations, and so on are a kind of trusteeship possessions and
they are considered as government's and people's depository and they do mentioned tasks on behalf of people and government. In spite of being
aware, whenever they are committed treason and abuse in doing their assigned tasks contrary to general expectations, it is clear that their acts
will be encountered with people's and government's anger, hatred and severe reaction. And these not only exists in our country but also in most
countries and such acts and injustices towards public properties were associated with severe reactions and punishments and consequently the
mentioned punishments had been enforced and prosecuted in our country in the past and present. But what is caused the mind to explore is that
why do persons who are people's depository and are serving for people commit such acts?
Do we consider this subject in terms of pessimism or we should think and contemplate more about it? Indeed, why do people who have obtained
a degree of trust and undertake people's and government's properties and cash lose the result of years of individual and collective efforts that
have suffered to teach and educate them, and in these cases they are actually directed towards ruin and defame according to the specified
regulations and punishments?
The purpose is not to defend these actions because due to every reason they are not acceptable and confirmable for each person so simplification
had not been effective in these cases and no problems will be solved. So does it suitable to detect and to destroy the reasons and conditions of
such actions instead of severe reaction in terms of punishment?
1.1 Statement of the problem
One of the most important problems of the world, especially in the third world and developing countries, is government employees' violations
and crimes and their financial abuse of government properties that have been increased. Simply by looking at the criminal records of
government employees, we find this point that embezzlement crime is one of the most common crimes of government employees. Another
important point is that why do government employees do such a crime? How is the impact of social, cultural, political, and economical
conditions and mismanagement and lack of control and supervision by the supervisory authorities on doing this crime by government
employees? Therefore, investigating fields and reasons of committing this crime is important that discussing it can lead to solve many problems.

2.

The legal definition of embezzlement crime

In our country, the legislator has dealt with explaining the conditions of fulfillment and some cases of embezzlement crime but no definition has
been stated about this crime. Lawyers have stated different definitions and theories for embezzlement crime term that are briefly discussed:
embezzlement means removing all or a part of public funds and properties belonging to the government that are assigned to government
employee and he personally holds the properties or funds with bad intention and consumes them for himself or others or when he hides
properties or funds (Ra'astin, 1973, p. 134). Embezzlement is applied for a certain type of breach of trust crime by government employee and it

Ershad Kaviani Mobarakeh *

76

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

happens when an official who has been given government property regarding legal duty takes it illegally (Validi, 1994, p. 312). Government
employee's treachery in properties entrusted to him regarding duty (Shambiati, 1996, p. 133). Embezzlement means intentionally taking and
changing others' property or fund that has been legally entrusted in person to personal property; also it is the abuse of position or trusteeship. The
mentioned legal status may be resulted from official position, public position, employment or trusteeship (Aghaei, 1999, pp.481-482).In legal
terminology, the term embezzlement has been defined as embezzlement elements consist of: a. that the person who commits the crime is an
employee of government or municipality or bank is not important whether he is a formal official or not; b. when he takes movable property or
cash that are entrusted to him for doing his duty; c. when he has a fraudulent intent; d. when he does his intention and having intention in mind is
not enough; e. when he obtains property or interest (Jafari Lang-e roodi, 1984, p.19). When a government employee takes government's or
people's properties that have been entrusted to him regarding duty with a bad intention on the behalf of himself or other (Goldoozian, 2006,
p.416). As we saw, the lawyers have not provided a common definition about this crime because there is no definition about this crime in penal
code but it is mentioned to its conditions and main elements. But with respect to the complex of mentioned definitions, this crime can be defined
as: embezzlement means when the government employee or a person who is working as government employee takes property that has been
entrusted to him regarding his job and duty whether its action is on behalf of himself or other.

3.

Prevention of embezzlement crime

Taking an exact criminal policy (Rahiminejad, 1996, p.127) and some principles to prevent the occurrence of crime and the incidence of
dangerous situation and also sinners' reformation and treatment requires investigating the reasons and causes of the emergence of crime and
dangerous situation that it is mainly the subject of studying criminology. More or less, all countries are being involved in embezzlement crime in
administrative system and its resulted damages are countless. It is necessary to a country that takes a step towards the development to deal with
this important matter away from the category of financial crimes and to prevent the increase of damages in future, a serious and consistent
struggle should be applied with all powers in all fields against the causes of its incidence to establish a constant and overall development in
country. So to realize the reality of the current situation in our country and seeking a remedy to solve this great social problem, it is appropriate
to study the effective factors in occurring the sin of embezzlement and approaches to fight against embezzlement crime.

4.

The effective factors in occurring embezzlement crime

Since government, administrative organizations and public institutes were established, abuse of authorities and financial corruption has been
appeared and it had been a serious danger for society and people in the past and present. Among these, embezzlement is the most common types
of abuse. Two questions will be arisen in mind by dealing with this phenomenon:
1. Basically, why do such problems occur and why do people who must be unique in honesty become suddenly treacherous and behave
against their promise and trusteeship?
2. How is it possible to overcome these problems and to prevent their increase?
Of course, it should be noted that in all antisocial and criminal behaviors, social and human science experts such as criminologists and
sociologists play an effective role in improving the criminal status of society in general and transforming administrative system and reducing
abuses and financial corruptions in organizations and government agencies in particular. It should be noted that committing embezzlement and
financial corruption are occurred in administrative system in two forms of macro and micro. In each case, the specific causes may play a greater
role and some factors influence both cases. For example, the absence or weakness of control system, inspection and supervision can be effective
in both cases whereas the needy and insufficient earnings are a factor that affects more in committing micro embezzlement; or support and
benefiting from political or administrative protection is a factor that leads senior and high-ranking officials to commit embezzlement. Financial
corruption and macro embezzlement is typically an embezzlement that is done by superior individuals in the form of a band with high and
significant digits. Perpetrators of these embezzlements are white collar criminals and the owners of wealth; while they cause irreparable damages
to society, they are less prosecuted by penal justice system; this group is immune from prosecution by benefiting from "justifies ability",
"protection" or "escape possibility" except the miser one who has lost his three sites for some reasons. Micro and minor embezzlement is a kind
of embezzlement that is done by middle and lower class employees with relatively low digits. The most important factor that plays an effective
role in doing this crime is that inferior employees follow managers' and senior officials' way, i.e. when these persons see or feel that their
manager is not afraid of doing such an action then they commit the crime by confirming such a manner. In a research conducted recently, it has
been said:"one of the most important points that have been found after the investigation of the severity of corruption in different countries is that
administrative corruption in middle and lower ranks mainly depends on the amount of corruption among policymakers and senior employees.
When a part of government is corrupted, middle managers' help is required to achieve corrupt incomes from one hand and it is forced to
undermine regulatory institutions such as press, legal departments and inspection organizations, on the other hand (office of economic
inspections, 1998, pp.116-117). Distinction between the corruption of government managers, ministers, and senior employees, and the
corruption between inferior employees (customs officers and policemen, and etc) is very useful. Corruption in government is a problem that can
be basically solved by the government of that damaged country. So there is no hope to solve the problem of "micro corruption" without
controlling "macro corruption". Embezzlement is an administrative and financial corruption and the conducted studies show that there are three
types of factors and conditions that are more effective in doing and committing this crime as the first group is named "internal factors", the
second group is "external factors", and the third group is "indirect factors"; then we mention to three types of factors.
4.1. Internal factors
Internal factors that lead to the crime of embezzlement are provided through some systems in government departments that consist of following
cases:
4.1.1. Payment levels
Compensation of the appropriate services of government employees is one of the factors to reduce corruption level in offices especially
embezzlement crime in government offices. Undoubtedly, most middle and lower class employees are led to deviated path due to their low
salaries and insufficient income to provide the minimum livelihood. Due to low salary, a large group of employees who constitute the majority
of workers are forced to do other activities. When the salary of worker or employee is not sufficient to meet his needs, he will be directed to
commit bribery, breach of trust, and embezzlement to reach the same level in terms of economic status with social level of other social classes.
On the other hand, avarice and unhealthy competition between senior managers and employees of offices and governmental organizations are
major factors that have a great impact to direct this group in committing embezzlement. These persons make the society poorer day to day by

77

The Investigation of Embezzlement Crime from Criminology and Statistical Analysis of Its Effective Factors
International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

embezzling public properties and increasing their wealth and they are rushing to create poverty that is the main factor in committing
embezzlement among inferior employees.
4.1.2. Lack of adequate supervision or system problems
There are two problems in this communication, one is that system have some defects and does not have sufficient control on this problem and
the second one is that there is no enough supervision i.e. there is a system of performance command and circular but this circular is not
considered and a controller person who checks these maybe does not perform this act; in my idea there are two problems now. On the other
hand, our administrative and organizational systems are changing and now want to change from a traditional situation to a modern network and
use all tools; it is clear that some problems will be emerged in this evolution. If the supervision and inspection agencies do not do their tasks
well, those employees who are weak in faith and virtue are not afraid of committing abuse. Supervision and control are important factors in
preventing employees to be financially corrupted in governmental offices if the inspection and supervision are exactly taken in offices and
governmental organizations and its results are published; we will be less encountered with administrative violations and crimes. Unfortunately,
in the current situation, it is observed in many cases that government employees consider themselves free and are not afraid of doing illegal
activities. In many cases when employees conclude that there is nobody to blame them for their illegal activities, some will be impudent and
continue their activities to destroy public and governmental properties.
4.1.3. Meritocracy
Features of meritocracy play an important role in reducing corruption and financial crimes such as government employees' embezzlement. So
being professional in administrative management is important. Undoubtedly, the presence of professionals in government positions reduces the
sudden occurrence of crime. Managers' mismanagement and weakness, especially senior managers, is another factor that is effective in directing
employees towards illegal activities and abuse of their position. The managers should deserve for the task undertaken on them and be able to do
the assigned tasks.
4.1.4. Lack of law enforcement by senior managers and officials in agencies and governmental organizations
Lack of the enforcement of laws and regulations in agencies and organizations is one of the other effective factors in the incidence of financial
crimes from employees especially senior managers and officials. Society needs law and order and its necessity is twofold in association with
agencies and governmental organizations. In a society whose managers is violating the law and replaces ways to escape with law, no regulations
are taken there. In this society, abuse and corruption will be publically accepted and there is no hope for reformation and reconstruction as long
as legalism is not observed. So legal transgression is one of the factors affecting the financial corruption and abuse of authorities in government
in general and corruption in particular; and different characters can be involved and unfortunately some senior managers consider it legal in
some cases.
4.2. External factors
External factors of corruption are created through systems outside the office and they are often public factors, judicial and legal factors that are
included following cases:
4.2.1. Legal effectiveness
Weak legal system can be a source of corruption. The ineffective legal system may be used by people for personal interest. Generally, the
construction of Iran's legislator, either before or after revolution has been based on the policy of intensifying punishment. Designers and
programmers of Iran's criminal policy have begun to combat with this criminal phenomenon with the influence of this idea "intimidating and
threatening". But there is doubt in the influence of such a way to prevent committing this crime and its reduction. In the law of punishment
intensification for bribery, embezzlement, and fraud, it should be said: definitely, the legislator's motivation had been the reformation of existing
deficiencies and straits of enforcing performable regulations and reduction of committing crimes had been the subject of law and nothing else.
Looking at the existing statistics and numbers in the history of prisons can be considered as a guide to administrators of the affairs of
governmental liable institutions to achieve practical and real approaches. The number of embezzlement cases led to issuing conviction to
imprisonment sentence indicates the number of committing the financial crime and if the approval date of punishment intensification law i.e.
1988 is considered as basis, it is expected that due to enforcing this law, the number of this crime is reduced and gradually directs to a one-digit
number and finally to zero; if such an event is happened, providence and realism of intensification law and its favorable effect in the financial
system of country will be realized. But the fact is that the number of years after law enforcement regularly shows the increasing process of
committing the crime, however, the population of country has been increased and maybe in comparison to the number of perpetrators to the total
population in basis year, the ratio of perpetrators to the total population in recently one or two years seem insignificant; but developing
technology and increasing complexity of the innovation of financial employees who have fraudulent intent should be involved in considering
these digits and their analysis. In 1988, about 707 persons were sentenced and imprisoned due to embezzlement accusation. This group of
offenders committed financial crime in the years before 1988 and the steps of prosecution and investigations were enforced on their accusative
files in the primary court and revision was announced and it became certain in 1988; but this amount has been increased to 1401 persons in 1997
while the intensification law had been enforced; as it past, the rate of crime should be decreased during the years of enforcing intensification law
in 1988. In other words, if we dont accept the growth of committing embezzlement crime after enforcing intensification law and assume 1401
cases of embezzlement in 1988 as 707 cases in 1988 (year of accounting basis), the equality of intensification law with discount law will be
determined again (Hemayat Journal, 2005, p.45). Also, we understand that having a society free from financial experts' fraudulence is not
realized just by resolving to severe regulations but other scientific and logical methods should be sought that according to these methods
enforcing punishment is the last solution.
4.2.2. Transparency
The presence of numerous weaknesses in documenting economical and political activities and financial status of real and legal persons is the
most important cause of corruption occurrence in any country. Direct result of this deficiency (lack of documentation) is the impossibility of
creating transparency in the carried activities and financial status of persons that this matter (the impossibility of creating transparency in
economic, political, administrative, social, and cultural activities) is the main cause of corruption occurrence.
This kind of performance is more about senior managers and officials in offices and government organizations; in fact, it is one of the effective
factors in committing financial corruption and abuse of authorities in offices in general and embezzlement in particular.
4.3. Indirect factors
Following factors are considered as indirect factors in creating embezzlement crime:

Ershad Kaviani Mobarakeh *

78

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

4.3.1. Cultural variables

In society, the area of group-oriented- individualism is one of the determining factors in the field of financial corruption. Collective cultures that
are seen in traditional group are described as one group by depending on the loyalty; close relationships in these cultures prevents financial
corruption. But in individualistic cultures that its feature is less cooperation among different members of society, policies of mutual cooperation
will be decreased. Therefore, the boundary between private and public domains is clearer that leads to detect corruption easier. For example,
detecting bribe from gift or personal properties from governmental properties is easy.
4.3.2. Economical variables
Financial corruptions including embezzlement are considered as one of the problems arisen from economical weakness.
GDP is the most important economical indicators of corruption that states when economy is developed corruption will be reduced. Economical
stability in every society is the most important factor in continuing society life with peace, comfort, and safety; also, nobody pays delay cost of
solving problems and providing economical stability except nation; societies' development and economical growth depend on economical
stability because besides providing safety feeling in domestic and foreign investors, economical stability guarantees property security in
investors by creating explicit legislations in economical fields. Currently, lack of adequate and developed legislations, poorly informed and
efficient management, poorly administrative and controlling systems, inflation, economic discipline, financial crises, and uncertainty among
people and government are some reasons to create economical instability in society. According to government ability in every economical part,
research and investigation should be taken and conscious decisions should be adopted for solving these problems. Economical indiscipline or
internal structure of economical system is among the most influential factors on the economical stability of every society that ignoring it leads to
financial crises by internal and external stimuli, also creates the extreme class gap between the rich and poor, and finally creates economical
corruption. Factors such as the role of government and tools taking in economical field, social characteristics of country, the nature of the
political structure of the country, and penal system against frauds and administrative and hidden corruption in fluctuations of economical
corruption rate and disobeying economy discipline play an important role. Wherever economical and administrative corruption has been become
a way to live, overall revolutions is necessary and just throwing some rotten apples is not enough. Although nobody clearly support economical
and administrative corruption, beneficiary groups use special tactics to remove public motivation and blunt the blade of reformations to
impoverish anti-corruption laws that to overcome such strategies, public insistence and support is very necessary; and it is the beginning of a
long and difficult path in the entire world. However, fighting against financial corruption is being broadly supported, beneficiary groups oppose
to reformations. Also, economical corruption and embezzlement have strong advocates such as some high-ranking officials, companies with
strong financial resources, and influential mediators.

5.

Research variables

Payment levels, lack of qualitative monitoring, meritocracy, education, lack of law enforcement, the effectiveness of law, lack of transparency
on the financial status of officials, cultural variables, economical variables

6.

Research hypotheses

1. Payment levels influence the occurrence of embezzlement crime.

2. Lack of adequate monitoring influences the occurrence of embezzlement crime.
3. Meritocracy influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
4. Education influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
5. Lack of law enforcement influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
6. Lack of transparency on the financial status of officials influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
7. Cultural variables influence the occurrence of embezzlement.
8. Economical variables influence the occurrence of embezzlement.
9. The effectiveness of law influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
10. There is a relationship or coefficient between economical variables and payment levels.
11. There is a relationship or coefficient between meritocracy and lack of law enforcement.
12. Effective factors on embezzlement such as education, economical variables, the effectiveness of law, meritocracy, lack of law enforcement,
lack of adequate monitoring, cultural variables, lack of transparency on the financial status of officials and payment levels do not have a same
effect.

7.

Methodology

In the present study, descriptive research method was used. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors affecting embezzlement and
analyzing the relationship between these factors. Therefore, descriptive study was firstly carried i.e. collecting statistics and data about the
subject then analytical study was done. In this study, data was collected through the questionnaire given to the employees.
Statistical population
The employees of offices in Mobarakeh are the statistical population in this study.
Statistical sample
The size of sample for testing the significance of research hypotheses was obtained by using the following equation:
d(n 1)n
Z =
Z
(n 1) + 1.21(Z 1.06)
That by considering Z

= 1.645 and Z

= 0.8416, we have:

0.2(n 1)n
1.645
(n 1) + 1.21(1.645 1.06)
By accounting n in the above equation, sample size was obtained 156.
0.8416 =

79

The Investigation of Embezzlement Crime from Criminology and Statistical Analysis of Its Effective Factors
International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

8.

Data analysis

In the present study, the preference order of effective factors on the occurrence of embezzlement crime from the employees' point of view was
obtained by using paired comparison. T-test was used to examine the significance of research hypotheses and Spearman test was used to
investigate the relationship between variables; Kruskal-Wallis test was used to investigate the unequal effect of factors affecting the occurrence
of embezzlement from the employees' point of view.

9.

Description of research's findings

For comparing and the preference order, 9 factors affecting the occurrence of embezzlement crime from the employees' point of view, 36
comparisons should be done according to the equation:
n(n 1)
2
The number of these comparisons was beyond the employees' patience and the possibility of making mistake was very high so these numbers
were randomly divided between employees as everyone has done 12 comparisons. Then the times of priority of one factor were measured than
other factors and the priority order of factors was obtained as follows.
1- meritocracy
2- economical variables
3- Payment levels
4- lack of qualitative monitoring
5- lack of transparency on the financial status of officials
6- the effectiveness of law
7- lack of law enforcement
8- cultural variables
9- education

10. Sampling description of research's findings

According to the collected data, 60% of the sample persons totally agreed that meritocracy is an effective factor in the occurrence of
embezzlement crime. While this percent about economical variables, payment levels, lack of adequate supervision, lack of transparency on the
financial status of officials, legal effectiveness and lack of law enforcement, cultural and educational variables were 32, 23, 24, 24, 13, 11, 12,
and 8 respectively; like findings of pair comparison, it shows that a higher percentage of persons agree with meritocracy as an effective factor on
embezzlement; for other variables that have a lower priority, percentage of agreement is gradually reduced. Most percentage of opposition, with
factors of cultural and educational variables had been respectively 36% and 37%.

11. The comparison of effective factors on embezzlement from the employees' point of view
Table 1. The comparison of effective factors
Factors

mean

S.D

variance

Meritocracy

3.4

.833

.694

economical variables

3.1

.769

.591

Payment levels

2.94

.855

.731

lack of qualitative monitoring

2.88

.887

.787

lack of transparency on the financial status of officials

2.85

.874

.763

the effectiveness of law

2.78

.756

.572

lack of law enforcement

2.72

.833

.694

cultural variables

2.61

.792

.627

education

2.46

.822

.676

In table1, factors were written based on priority order that was obtained in pair comparison; if we move from up to down in mean columns of
table, mean decreases from 3/4 to 2/46; this matter confirms the obtained priority in pair comparison.

12. Hypotheses test

10. There is a relationship or coefficient between economical variables and payment levels.
11. There is a relationship or coefficient between meritocracy and lack of law enforcement.
12. Effective factors on embezzlement such as education, economical variables, the effectiveness of law, meritocracy, lack of law enforcement,
lack of adequate monitoring, cultural variables, lack of transparency on the financial status of officials and payment levels do not have a same
effect.
1. Meritocracy influences the occurrence of embezzlement.

Ershad Kaviani Mobarakeh *

80

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

H : =
H :
P-value is lower than 0.05.(t=13.552) So the hypothesis is significant i.e. meritocracy is a factor affecting the occurrence of embezzlement crime.
P-value is more than 0.05. So the hypothesis is not significant i.e. cultural variables are not among factors affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
2. Economical variables influence the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=9.688). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. Economical variables are a factor affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
3. Payment levels influence the occurrence of embezzlement crime.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=6.366). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. Payment levels are a factor affecting the occurrence of embezzlement
crime.
4. Lack of adequate monitoring influences the occurrence of embezzlement crime.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=5.416). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. Lack of adequate monitoring is a factor affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
5. Lack of transparency on the financial status of officials influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=4.949). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. Lack of transparency on the financial status of officials is a factor
affecting the occurrence of embezzlement crime.
6. The effectiveness of law influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=4.66). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. The effectiveness of law is a factor affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
7. Lack of law enforcement influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is lower than 0.05(t=3.267). So the hypothesis is significant i.e. Lack of law enforcement is a factor affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
8. Cultural variables influence the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is more than 0.05(t=1.719). So the hypothesis is not significant i.e. cultural variables are not among factors affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
9. Education influences the occurrence of embezzlement.
P-value is more than 0.05(t=-0.584). So the hypothesis is not significant i.e. Education is not among factors affecting the occurrence of
embezzlement crime.
10. There is a relationship or correlation between economical variables and payment levels.
Value of pearson chi-square test is 175.493 so the hypothesis is significant i.e. there is a relationship or correlation between economical
variables and payment levels.
Spearman correlation is 0.547so the hypothesis is significant i.e. correlation between two factors is significant. From the employees' point of
view, payment levels will be increased if economical variables improve in the macro and micro levels of society.
11. There is a relationship between meritocracy and lack of law enforcement.
Value of pearson chi-square test is 74.019 so the hypothesis is significant i.e. there is a relationship between meritocracy and lack of law
enforcement.
Correlation test
Spearman Correlation

Value
.331

Approx. Sig.
.000

Spearman correlation is 0.331 so the hypothesis is significant i.e. there is a relationship between meritocracy and lack of law enforcement.
According to the employees, the more the deserved people are selected, the more the rules are enforced by managers and authorities.
12. Factors affecting embezzlement include education, economical variables, the effectiveness of law, meritocracy, lack of law enforcement,
lack of adequate supervision, cultural variables, lack of transparency on the financial status of officials, and payment levels are not effectively
equal.
To examine this hypothesis, Kruskal Wallis test was used. The first seven factors that their effect is significant by using t-test are used in this test
and educational and cultural factors that are not significant are not examined.
Table 2. Kruskal Wallis Test
factors

numbers

df

meritocracy

156

111862.92

717.07

economical variables

156

92146.08

590.68

Payment levels

156

84951.36

544.56

lack of qualitative monitoring

156

81968.64

525.44

lack of transparency

156

78906.36

505.81

the effectiveness of law

156

74295

476.25

lack of law enforcement

156

74295

465.69

p-value

81.757

0. 000

According t0 table2 test is significant i.e. the mentioned seven factors do not have a same effect on the occurrence of embezzlement crime.

13. Conclusion
Embezzlement is an administrative and financial crime and studies show that three types and conditions are more effective than others in
committing this crime. The first type is named "internal factors", the second type is "external factors", and the third type is named "indirect

81

The Investigation of Embezzlement Crime from Criminology and Statistical Analysis of Its Effective Factors
International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences Vol(4), No (1), January, 2015.

factors". In the criminal policy of our country, instead of paying more attention to the underlying causes of this phenomenon, punishment
intensification and more threatening are used and this is one of the factors play a role in ascending development of the crime. So it is worthy that
instead of penal struggle, other solutions should be taken to solve this great social problem mentioned at the end of this paper. According to
above explanations, 9 factors affecting the occurrence of embezzlement crime were given to some samples of employees that they preferred
them as follows that according to t-test, factors of meritocracy, economical variables, payment levels, lack of adequate supervision, lack of
transparency on the financial status of officials, legal effectiveness, lack of law enforcement were statistically significant. Educational and
cultural variables are not statistically significant. Meritocracy and lack of law enforcement are significant by using Chi-square tests. Also, to
examine that the effective factors have the same effect on the occurrence of embezzlement crime, Kruskal-Wallis test was used and findings
show that seven factors that were significant in t-test do not have the same effect on the occurrence of embezzlement crime.

References
Micheal, W., Jr., & White, E. B. (1977). The elements of style. (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan, (Chapter 4).
Aghaei Bahman .(1999). legal dictionary, 1st edition, Tehran: Ganj-e Danesh
Jafari Lang-e roodi MJ. (1984). Legal terminology, Tehran: Ganj-e Danesh
Bureau of Economic Surveys. (1998). Recognizing factors affecting embezzlement, Journal of Parliament and Research, No. 25
Goldoozian I.( 2006). Special penal laws, 12th edition, Tehran: Tehran University Press
Mohaghegh Damad M. (1985). Investigation from Islam's point of view, Hagh quarterly, No. 1, Justice of Islamic Republic of Iran
Rahiminejad E. (2001). An introduction to penal laws and criminology, 2nd edition, Islamic Publications Bureau of Qom Seminary
Ra'astin M. (1973). State's penal regulations, 1st edition, Tehran: Tehran University Press
Sayyed Ghotb, Fi zalal al-mobin al-quran, 2nd edition
Validi MS. (1994). Special penal laws. 3rd edition, Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications