There is an interesting, albeit hypothetical, case in Scripture for this sort of a thing. After the incident with Uriah and Bat Sheva, the prophet Nathan comes to King David (Shmuel II 12:1-4) and relates to him an incident in a parable:
There were two men in one city: the one rich, and the other poor. The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds; but the poor man had nothing save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared; and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own morsel, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him, but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
The halachic penalty the rich man was obligated in was for stealing and slaughtering a sheep, so he was should've been sentenced to a 4-sheep penalty payment, but instead, on top of the payment, King David sentences him to death (12:5), presumably to set him as an example for the people.