Motivación en las sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract: This thesis analyzes the reasoning behind the judgment issued by the Riobamba Criminal Guarantees Tribunal in case No. 06282-2024-02839, concerning the alleged crime of fraud as defined in Article 186 of the Comprehensive Organic Penal Code. The general objective is to analyze and evaluate whether the judgment s reasoning is correct and sufficient, determining whether it meets the constitutional and doctrinal standards required in a constitutional state based on rights and justice. The research employed a qualitative, documentary-based approach, utilizing the analytical legal method, Atienza s "EL SER" method, and standard questionnaires regarding sufficiency and correctness of reasoning as evaluation tools. The study focused on the judgment handed down on October 14, 2025, in which the Tribunal upheld the innocence of the accused following the Prosecutor's Office's decision not to press charges, basing its ruling on the accusatorial principle enshrined in Article 609 of the Comprehensive Organic Penal Code. The results indicate that, while the judgment s reasoning is procedurally sufficient regarding its formal structure, it is substantively insufficient, as it fails to provide an in-depth analysis of the constituent elements of the crime of fraud. The study concludes that the judicial decision is valid from the perspective of the accusatorial system but could be improved regarding the depth of the legal reasoning applied.