Jerusalem Talmud Shevuot 8:4

משנה: אָמַר לַשּׁוֹאֵל אֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי אָמַר לוֹ מֵת וְהוּא שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִשְׁבַּר וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִשְׁבָּה וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִגְנַב וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ אָבַד. אָבַד וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אֲנִי וְאָמַר אָמֵן פָּטוּר׃ אֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי אָמַר לוֹ אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה אַתָּה שָׂח וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אֲנִי וְאָמַר אָמֵן חַייָב. אָמַר לְנוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר אֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי אָמַר לוֹ מֵת וְהוּא שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה. נִשְׁבַּר וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה. נִשְׁבָּה וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר. נִגְנַב וְהוּא שֶׁאָבַד. אָבַד וְהוּא שֶׁנִּגְנַב. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אֲנִי וְאָמַר אָמֵן פָּטוּר. מֵת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה וְהוּא שֶׁנִּגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אֲנִי וְאָמַר אָמֵן חַייָב. אָבַד אוֹ נִגְנַב וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה פָּטוּר. זֶה הַכְּלָל כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּע לְהָקֵל עַל עַצְטוֹ חַייָב. לְהַחְמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ פָּטוּר. MISHNAH: He said to the borrower, “where is my ox?” He told him, “it died,” but it broke, or was abducted, or stolen, or lost⁷⁰These are the cases enumerated in Ex. 22:6,9, where the unpaid keeper swears but does not have to pay. Breakage refers to vessels, not to animals; it is included since it appears in the verse.. “It broke,” but it died, or was abducted, or stolen, or lost. “ ”It was abducted,” but it died, or broke, or was stolen, or lost. “It was stolen,” but it died, or broke, or was abducted, or lost. “It was lost,” but it died, or broke, or was abducted, or stolen. “I want you to swear;” he answered “Amen”. He is not liable⁸⁵Since the borrower pays for any of the reasons mentioned, by his oath he does not deprive the owner of any money. Therefore no sacrifice is due..
“Where is my ox?” He told him, “I do not know.” “What are you telling?” But if had died, or broke, or was abducted, or stolen, or lost. “I want you to swear;” he answered “Amen”. He is liable⁸⁶He denies ever having borrowed an ox. His oath is to the detriment of the owner; a sacrifice is due in addition to the restitution of 125% of the value..
He said to the recipient of a fee or to a renter, “where is my ox?” He told him, “it died,” but it broke or was abducted; “it broke,” but it died or was abducted; “it was abducted,” but it died or broke; “it was stolen,” but it was lost; “it was lost,” but it was stolen. “I want you to swear;” if he said “Amen”, he is not liable.
“It died, or it broke, or it was abducted,” when it was stolen or lost. “I want you to swear;” if he said “Amen”, he is liable. “It was lost, or stolen,” when it died, or broke, or was abducted; he is not liable. This is the principle: Anybody who swears to his benefit is liable, to his detriment is not liable.

הלכה: תַּנֵּי. לֹא לְהָקֵל וְלֹא לְהַחֲמִיר חַייָב. אָמַר רִבִּי. מַתְנִיתָא אָֽמְרָה כֵן. אָמַר לַשּׁוֹאֵל אָמַר לְשׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם אָמַר לְנוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר. אֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי. אָמַר לוֹ. מֵת. מָהוּ שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ. בּוֹא וְהִשָּׁבַע לִי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַתָּה עֵינֶיךָ בָהּ לְגוֹזְלָהּ. מִכָּל־מָקוֹם אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם. מָהוּ דְיֵימַר לֵיהּ. אֲפִילוּ דְאַתְּ יְהַב לִי כַמָּה דִּידִי אֲנָא בָעֵי גַבָּךְ. HALAKHAH: It was stated: If it was neither to his benefit nor to his detriment, he is liable¹²⁶There is a baraita which disagrees with the Mishnah and holds that a false oath is a false oath even if the false formulation does no harm to the other party.. Rebbi said, a baraita says so: “If he said to the borrower, the unpaid trustee, the recipient of a fee, or the renter, ‘where is my ox?’ This one said, ‘it died.’¹²⁷Tosephta 6:7 starts in this way; but the baraita must have the person who swore falsely not to the detriment of the depositor as liable to the penalties of a false oath.” May he tell him, “come and swear to me that you never thought of rustling it”^128,Could the depositor ask that the paid trustee or renter, or even the borrower, who paid for the lost or stolen object, nevertheless swear that they do not hold the object in their possession? The first argument is against, for the oath will not change the monetary situation. The second argument is in favor; there is a value to one’s own possession which cannot be expressed in monetary terms. The answer is not given, nor is the question raised in the Babli. In the absence of guidance, a court cannot act.²³The owner of an object stolen from an unpaid keeper. If he cannot recoup his loss he might be tempted to let the keeper swear in the hope that he might prefer to pay rather than swear.? In any case he would not pay; what could he say? “Even if you would pay me a lot, I want from you what is mine.”