[POMPONIUS libro trigensimo octauo ad Quintum Mucium. ] §13.1.16.prQui furtum admittit uel re commodata uel deposita utendo, condicione quoque ex furtiua causa obstringitur: quae differt ab actione commodati hoc, quod, etiamsi sine dolo malo et culpa eius interierit res, condictione tamen tenetur, cum in commodati actione non facile ultra culpam et in depositi non ultra dolum malum teneatur is, cum quo depositi agetur.
[POMPOMIUS, on Quintus Mucius, Book XXXVIII] He who commits theft by using a thing either lent or deposited is also liable to a condictio based on a theftuous cause; which differs from the action on loan in this respect, that even if the thing has perished without his malice or fault, he is nevertheless liable to the condictio; whereas in the action on loan a person is not easily held liable beyond fault, and in the action on deposit, the person against whom the action on deposit is brought is not held liable beyond malice.