疯比特
--
Shock! Court Ruling: The USDT that was stolen may be confiscated? Is it legal?!
Imagine if you were robbed, but the court told you that your loss cannot be compensated, and may even be confiscated because your trading activities involved illegal financial activities. Would you accept that?
Zhang San and Li Si traded USDT online multiple times, but ultimately, because Zhang San did not transfer the coins as agreed, Li Si attempted to seek justice but was forced by Zhang San to hand over the wallet's private key, resulting in the USDT being stolen. The case was filed, Zhang San was convicted of robbery, but what surprised Li Si was that the court ruled his USDT trading as illegal financial activity, and according to relevant regulations, his USDT was confiscated.
But the question arises: Li Si merely bought and sold USDT, and the transaction was forcibly interrupted. Should such behavior be regarded as "illegal financial activity"? According to my lawyer friend’s interpretation, the court’s ruling may be illegal.
Firstly, the so-called "illegal financial activities" do not include the simple buying and selling behaviors of individuals like Li Si; only the relevant operations of exchanges fall into this category. Furthermore, according to our country's laws, many administrative penalty documents do not have enforcement power, and such handling cannot be punished according to the law.
The compensation that Li Si should have received should not be "legally confiscated"! The issue of judicial fairness behind this deserves our deep reflection. What does everyone think?
Imagine if you were robbed, but the court told you that your loss cannot be compensated, and may even be confiscated because your trading activities involved illegal financial activities. Would you accept that?
Zhang San and Li Si traded USDT online multiple times, but ultimately, because Zhang San did not transfer the coins as agreed, Li Si attempted to seek justice but was forced by Zhang San to hand over the wallet's private key, resulting in the USDT being stolen. The case was filed, Zhang San was convicted of robbery, but what surprised Li Si was that the court ruled his USDT trading as illegal financial activity, and according to relevant regulations, his USDT was confiscated.
But the question arises: Li Si merely bought and sold USDT, and the transaction was forcibly interrupted. Should such behavior be regarded as "illegal financial activity"? According to my lawyer friend’s interpretation, the court’s ruling may be illegal.
Firstly, the so-called "illegal financial activities" do not include the simple buying and selling behaviors of individuals like Li Si; only the relevant operations of exchanges fall into this category. Furthermore, according to our country's laws, many administrative penalty documents do not have enforcement power, and such handling cannot be punished according to the law.
The compensation that Li Si should have received should not be "legally confiscated"! The issue of judicial fairness behind this deserves our deep reflection. What does everyone think?
Disclaimer: Includes third-party opinions. No financial advice. May include sponsored content. See T&Cs.
0
0