Can the virtual currency of the lawsuit be executed?——Anding coins and successful execution cases

Source: Ruling Coin Circle

Abstract

In the past three years, virtual currency civil cases were hardly supported by the court, and most of them ended the request of the plaintiff.However, although the virtual currency civil contracts are invalid and do not affect the returned property after it is ineffective, many people have misunderstandings about this, including many cases handling units.However, compared to “whether virtual currency is protected by the court”, it seems more difficult to be implemented by the court as a property.The key point is:First, virtual currencies are not like bank account funds, which can be seized and frozen by the court; second, it is difficult for virtual currency to be evaluated by the court as a price and acknowledge its value.

Part/1

Case introduction

Li (a pseudonym) is an executive of a company in Guangdong. He met Wang (a pseudonym) because of his work, and the two became friends.Because Wang is more experienced in investing in virtual currency, the two have made an appointment with Li Mou, and Wang helped him take care of the investment matters.Li can remove the virtual currency managed by Wang at any time.

On December 3, 2020, Li paid about 1 million yuan to Wang, entrusted Wang to help buy, manage virtual currency ETH, and informed WangGood Wang must be authorized by Li to deal with this ETH.However, Wang secretly transferred ETH that Li Mou had entrusted him to his wallet and sold it. As a result, Li asked Wang to help him take out ETH, and Wang could not complete his previous agreement.Li missed the peak of ETH and lost a lot of money.

PART/2

Handle

1. A proxy commissioned contract dispute litigation and obtaining a victory judgment

After the incident, Li has always suffered from channels that have no reasonable rights protection. Once he learned the team of Lawyer Liu Lei through the Internet. After full consultation with Liu Lu, he felt that our team was very professional in handling virtual currency cases.Decide to entrust our team to intervene in the case.After fully evaluating the case, Liu Li organized team lawyers to jointly compile relevant evidence materials and filed a case with a district court in Guangzhou, where the defendant was located.After the case was filed, the team lawyer proceeded from multiple perspectives from the effectiveness of the contract, entrustment permissions, and the property attributes of virtual currencies to conduct legal demonstrations, requesting the court to determine that Wang returned Li ETH and compensated the loss.From the case to the trial, the lawyer communicated with the case of the case many times and submitted a legal opinion.During the communication process, the undertaking judge recognized multiple viewpoints of our team.

In February 2022, the court of first instance made a judgment:The contract was confirmed that the contract was invalid, and the two parties were responsible for the fault, and affirmed that the lawyer Liu Li team lawyer had a big mistake on the dedication of the defendant Wang’s private disposal.

Wang was not convinced to appeal. The court of second instance believed that the court of first instance determined that the facts were clear and the handling was not improper. In July 2022, the decision was rejected and the original judgment was maintained.This caseIt is also the first case in the country to return the virtual currency ETH after the “924 Notice”.

Second, the implementation stage is blocked, and the ruling will end the execution

After receiving the effective prosecution judgment, the team of Lawyer Liu Lei immediately actively coordinated the implementation with the court. However, due to the particularity of the implementation of the implementation of the case, the court had difficulty in implementing the implementation of the implementation of the effective judgment.In the end, the court believed that ETH involved in the case was a specific target, which could not be executed due to the loss, and because the two parties did not reach the discount compensation, the court ruled to end the implementation in February 2023.

Third, then litigation of compensation for property damage and finally in place

After the implementation of the case, in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the customer, Liu Lu’s team accounted for a new lawsuit with lawyer Qing Lawyer, and requested that Wang would order Wang to pay the unpaid ETH to Li Li.The case was accepted by the court in May 2023.During the lawsuit, the lawyer applied to seize the property under the defendant according to law, and organized a new legal opinion in conjunction with the case, and participated in the trial.The defendant asked the court to reject the prosecution on the grounds of repeated prosecution.

When the team occupied the lawyer to communicate to the undertaking judge: Even if the current law is prohibited from the virtual currency transaction, it cannot deny the fact that Wang will make Li Mou’s management of ETH.In the case of the defendant’s unable to return to the restoration, the plaintiff requested that the economic loss was compensated in cash, and the law was evident.After hearing, the court believed that ETH had indeed been lost and could not be implemented in the specific target of this case, but the plaintiff’s loss has not been substantially compensated so far.Therefore, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit based on the new facts, and did not belong to repeated prosecutions, and did not accept the defendant’s request to reject the prosecution.In addition, the court also recognized the view of the Liu Lu team’s discount compensation.

In the end, the overall consideration of the overall case, and the fact that Wang had paid a part of Li before, in November 2023, in November 2023, in November 2023, in November 2023, in November 2023,The court ruled that Wang would pay for the balance of virtual currency to pay for the rest.After the verdict came into effect, after the active coordination and communication of lawyers, Li had received the first discount.

Part/3

Lawyers have something to say

This case is the first jurisprudence to support the return of Ethereum after the release of the “924 Notice”, which is of great significance to the development of judicial practice related to virtual currency transactions.In this case, our team has won the judgment of the victory for the parties. Although it was stuck on the implementation problem, after the unremitting efforts of the team, the new property damage compensation dispute litigation was once again mentioned.Legal rights and interests.The team of Lawyer Liu Lei also reminded:When you encounter related problems, you must entrust professional lawyers to intervene as soon as possible to maximize their legitimate rights and interests.