Two conditions must be present, for co-perpetration to occur. These conditions are “the decision to commit a crime together” and “functional dominance over the act”. However, to ensure the condition of functional dominance, the perpetrators’ contributions to the crime do not have to be simultaneous. The perpetrators who decide to commit a crime together can also commit the crime by dividing labor among them. Some of the co-perpetrators among whom there is a division of labor may have started the execution of the crime directly, but the crime may have remained at the stage of attempt. In this case, it is controversial in the doctrine whether the perpetrators who have not yet made their contribution can be held responsible for the attempted crime. Various opinions have been put forward on this issue, especially individual and holistic solution proposals in German doctrine. According to the holistic solution, it is enough for one of the co-perpetrators to begin the execution and the other perpetrators will be held responsible for the attempted crime, even if they have not yet performed their part. According to the individual solution, the perpetrator, who has not yet contributed to the commission of the crime, cannot be held responsible for the attempted crime. Because, for each perpetrator to be held responsible for the attempt, he/she must personally begin the execution directly. In German doctrine and judicial practice mainly, the holistic theory is adopted. In Turkish doctrine and judicial practice, the issue has not been discussed enough. However, the importance of this discussion has been revealed, especially in the trials after the July 15 coup attempt.