If the court tells you that although you were robbed of your U, the related behavior of USDT is considered illegal financial activity and will not be returned to you, would you accept it?
Zhang San and Li Si met online because of the trading of USDT, and had multiple transactions during the period. The reason is that Zhang San did not transfer the coins to Li Si as agreed, so Li Si found Zhang San. However, Zhang San and others forced Li Si to hand over the wallet private key password, and then Li Si's U was robbed.
The case has been established, and Zhang San and others have been arrested, and the court has also convicted them of robbery. The victim Li Si hopes that USDT or money can be returned to him, but the court's judgment determines Li Si's actions regarding USDT, in accordance with the joint notice issued by ten departments including the People's Bank of China, the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security on further preventing and dealing with the risks of virtual currency trading speculation, that Li Si's behavior constitutes illegal financial activities. According to the above regulations, USDT or funds from selling coins should be handled by the relevant authorities in accordance with the law. This lawful processing is estimated to be confiscated, and those who understand, understand that it will not be given to Li Si.
What behaviors does Lisi have? The first is trading behavior, and the second is the behavior of being robbed. That is to say, the court's opinion is that the related transactions of USDT are illegal financial activities. Therefore, being robbed is a deceived behavior. Although you reported the case as a victim, the corresponding funds of USDT or trading coins are confiscated as illegal activities.
Can it be judged in this way? So I consulted my lawyer friend, and he thinks it can't be.
First, the effect of the notice of document 924 is a document. According to Article 16 of the Administrative Penalty Law, except for laws, regulations, and rules, other normative documents shall not establish administrative penalties. Moreover, under the current legal system in our country, normative documents such as the 2013 notice, the 2017 Announcement 94, and the 2021 notice 924 cannot establish types and measures of administrative penalties.
Secondly, virtual currency-related business activities belong to illegal financial activities. What are illegal financial activities? Examples are those business activities conducted by exchanges. Moreover, in the case of Li Si, the USDT that was either robbed or defrauded did not involve completed transactions and therefore did not fall under illegal financial activities.
So it should be returned to the victims, not handed over to the relevant authorities for disposal. What do you think, guys?
#BTC #ETH
Zhang San and Li Si met online because of the trading of USDT, and had multiple transactions during the period. The reason is that Zhang San did not transfer the coins to Li Si as agreed, so Li Si found Zhang San. However, Zhang San and others forced Li Si to hand over the wallet private key password, and then Li Si's U was robbed.
The case has been established, and Zhang San and others have been arrested, and the court has also convicted them of robbery. The victim Li Si hopes that USDT or money can be returned to him, but the court's judgment determines Li Si's actions regarding USDT, in accordance with the joint notice issued by ten departments including the People's Bank of China, the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security on further preventing and dealing with the risks of virtual currency trading speculation, that Li Si's behavior constitutes illegal financial activities. According to the above regulations, USDT or funds from selling coins should be handled by the relevant authorities in accordance with the law. This lawful processing is estimated to be confiscated, and those who understand, understand that it will not be given to Li Si.
What behaviors does Lisi have? The first is trading behavior, and the second is the behavior of being robbed. That is to say, the court's opinion is that the related transactions of USDT are illegal financial activities. Therefore, being robbed is a deceived behavior. Although you reported the case as a victim, the corresponding funds of USDT or trading coins are confiscated as illegal activities.
Can it be judged in this way? So I consulted my lawyer friend, and he thinks it can't be.
First, the effect of the notice of document 924 is a document. According to Article 16 of the Administrative Penalty Law, except for laws, regulations, and rules, other normative documents shall not establish administrative penalties. Moreover, under the current legal system in our country, normative documents such as the 2013 notice, the 2017 Announcement 94, and the 2021 notice 924 cannot establish types and measures of administrative penalties.
Secondly, virtual currency-related business activities belong to illegal financial activities. What are illegal financial activities? Examples are those business activities conducted by exchanges. Moreover, in the case of Li Si, the USDT that was either robbed or defrauded did not involve completed transactions and therefore did not fall under illegal financial activities.
So it should be returned to the victims, not handed over to the relevant authorities for disposal. What do you think, guys?
#BTC #ETH
0