A Article 5 paragraph (2) and article 12 letter b of law number 20 of 2001 concerning the amendment to law number 31 of 1999 concerning the eradication of criminal acts of corruption both regulate the acceptance of bribes by the same legal subject, namely civil servants or state officials. however, there are differences in the elements and characteristics of each article, particularly in the elements of the offense, and these differences are very important to understand so that the application of each article accords with the applicable provisions and cannot be misused in practice. to address this issue, normative research was conducted on corruption verdicts and statutory regulations. data processing was carried out qualitatively. the results of the research show that: 1) there are three (3) characteristic differences between the two articles, namely in the elements of the offense, the object of the giving, and the criminal sanctions threatened, and 2) in practice, the application of each article has been appropriate and consistent with statutory regulations; however, within the law itself there is an inconsistency, in which the element of intent (kesengajaan) under article 5 paragraph (2) carries a lighter criminal threat compared to the element of the offense under article 12 letter b. the conclusion of this research is that there are differences in the characteristic elements of the two articles, and that the application of the articles has been consistent. the author recommends that several efforts be undertaken to prevent errors in the future, such as the need for clear parameters in determining the appropriate article to apply, the use of grammatical and systematic methods of interpretation, and the need for harmonization of understanding among law enforcement officers so that the application of both articles accords with statutory regulations.