According to the legislative history of article 448 of the Chilean Venal Code, and to the constraining principles of the state-punish, such as the principle of legality, the principle of minimum intervention and the Criminal Law characteristic of being the "ultima ratio", it is possible to conclude that the account holder of a current account does not commit the crime of "theft by finding" when instructing withdrawals of funds mistakenly credited to his account; instead, he is bound to refund what was not due to him, with or without interests depending on whether he acted on bad or good faith, as prescribed by the rules of the quasi-contract ofindebiti solutio.La historia fidedigna del artículo 448 del Código Venal, además de los principios limitadores del ius puniendi estatal, tales como la tipicidad de la conducta incriminada, la mínima intervención y el carácter de ultima ratio del Derecho Venal, permiten concluir que el librador de una cuenta corriente bancaria que da órdenes de pago contra fondos abonados por error a su saldo disponible, no comete el delito de hurto de hallazgo, sino que se obliga a restituir el monto del dinero indebidamente recibido, con o sin intereses corrientes, dependiendo de su mala o buena fe, tal como lo prescriben los efectos del cuasicontrato de pago indebido.