From the Sichuan bitcoin robbery case to see the pricing problem, the two high authorities should issue a judicial interpretation

Leshan Price Certification Center determined that the case was robbed of bitcoins worth RMB 2,644,800 and ethereum worth RMB 3,443,100.

A bitcoin robbery case was recently decided by the Central District Court of Leshan City, Sichuan Province.

In October 2020, the defendant Liang was unable to repay his foreign debts and robbed his friend’s wife Luo Mouling of bitcoins in his account together with the defendant Wang Mouyou and Yuan Mou. The three posed as fresh food delivery personnel, lured the victim to a parking lot and took her to an empty lot, where they used violence and threats to force her to log into her cell phone “FireCoin Exchange” APP account and transfer 29.0004844 bitcoins and 1258.04064 ethereum from her account to her own. The next day, Liang and Yuan sold bitcoins without success. They then called the police and turned themselves in.

The court eventually found the three defendants guilty of robbery and sentenced them to prison terms ranging from seven years and six months to ten years, with a fine.

This verdict is interesting, especially when it comes to the price identification part. The Leshan Price Certification Center determined that the bitcoins taken in this case were worth RMB 2,644,800 and the ethereum was worth RMB 3,443,100.

In the previous Plustoken case, the Yancheng Price Bureau had made a valuation of the virtual currency involved in the case corresponding to fiat currency. When the verdict came out, Fire Little Law discussed with friends that the civil verdict avoided the issue of the price of the virtual currency and fiat currency, but the criminal verdict openly valued the virtual currency directly, which is not very contradictory.

When I was still in the system, I remembered a case involving ethereum. At that time, the industry did not have a deep study on the nature of virtual currency, whether it belongs to commodities, virtual property, data or other, there are many different opinions, the public prosecutor and the law are very headache, opened a number of internal seminars, and finally still think that according to the regulatory documents, can not easily price disposal.

This matter has been several years, but it is undeniable that, to this day, there are still many criminal case contractors who are not familiar with the policy of the regulator, and do not understand the relevant civil jurisprudence. Coupled with the constant hype of network information, the instinctive belief is that virtual currencies are of high value, especially mainstream currencies. Once a similar case occurs, it is usually directly considered as an embezzlement crime, and then the appraisal of the price bureau becomes a mandatory case handling process.

To be honest, this trend must be taken seriously.

Regarding the conversion of the value of virtual currency and fiat currency, civil judgments are relatively cautious. There is basically a consensus in the circle that the coin standard is more likely to be supported by the courts in civil judgments, and the fiat currency standard is taboo.

Two cases are typical. One was a bitcoin restitution case in the Shanghai First Intermediate Court last year, in which the court clarified that the website was not a recognized platform for publishing virtual currency trading prices in China, and that bitcoin trading price data on the website could not be used directly as the standard for determining losses. The other case was an arbitration award revocation case in the Shenzhen Intermediate Court, in which the arbitration award directly referred to the closing price published on the website to convert the BTC and BCH in question into RMB, which was tantamount to supporting the exchange and trading of bitcoin and fiat currency in disguise, and was found by the court to be in violation of the spirit of the policy document, and the above award was eventually revoked.

Returning to the criminal case, in fact, both civil and criminal cases should respect the policy documents of the regulator and maintain basic uniformity. Against the backdrop of civil rulings cautiously avoiding the fiat currency standard, criminal rulings have repeatedly directly priced virtual currencies directly, which is obviously inappropriate. What’s more, it will cause public perception of judicial confusion. Expect the two high authorities to issue relevant judicial interpretations as soon as possible to regulate the disposition of legal cases in the cryptocurrency circle.

Posted by:CoinYuppie,Reprinted with attribution to:
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.

Leave a Reply