Scan to download
BTC $61,309.73 -3.51%
ETH $1,595.01 -9.35%
BNB $576.85 -4.26%
XRP $1.11 -5.01%
SOL $64.45 -5.87%
TRX $0.3206 -3.28%
DOGE $0.0824 -6.30%
ADA $0.1584 -9.94%
BCH $211.86 -13.13%
LINK $7.43 -6.94%
HYPE $60.42 -4.76%
AAVE $62.68 -11.97%
SUI $0.7205 -4.70%
XLM $0.2049 +2.49%
ZEC $395.54 -12.26%
BTC $61,309.73 -3.51%
ETH $1,595.01 -9.35%
BNB $576.85 -4.26%
XRP $1.11 -5.01%
SOL $64.45 -5.87%
TRX $0.3206 -3.28%
DOGE $0.0824 -6.30%
ADA $0.1584 -9.94%
BCH $211.86 -13.13%
LINK $7.43 -6.94%
HYPE $60.42 -4.76%
AAVE $62.68 -11.97%
SUI $0.7205 -4.70%
XLM $0.2049 +2.49%
ZEC $395.54 -12.26%

dao

The Qingdao procuratorate clarifies the property nature of virtual currency in a case involving the theft of 107 bitcoins

According to Shandong Legal News, a Bitcoin theft case prosecuted by the Li Cang District Prosecutor's Office in Qingdao has been sentenced. The defendant, Zhang, was sentenced to 10 years and 9 months in prison for theft and fined 100,000 yuan.In the early hours of a certain day in 2024, the virtual currency wallet of the victim, Feng, was quietly accessed, and 107 Bitcoins were transferred, equivalent to over 22.54 million yuan at the market price on that day. It was found that Feng had entrusted an acquaintance, Zhang, to assist with the operation. During the process of registering the wallet on behalf of Feng, Zhang obtained the mnemonic phrase, and after multiple attempts in the early morning, he cracked the wallet and transferred the Bitcoins. After being apprehended, Zhang claimed that his actions were a "protective takeover" to prevent the Bitcoins from being stolen by others. The prosecution traced the funds and found that the stolen Bitcoins were transferred multiple times and exchanged for over 660,000 yuan, exposing his lies.The prosecution determined that Bitcoin has economic value and exclusive control, meeting the core characteristics of "property" in criminal law, and can be the object of theft. The actual proceeds from the sale of the stolen Bitcoins, amounting to over 660,000 yuan, were used as the basis for the theft amount. After the defendant appealed, in November 2025, the Qingdao Intermediate People's Court ruled to dismiss the appeal and upheld the original sentence. This case is a typical example of Qingdao's legal punishment of crimes in the virtual currency field, clearly conveying the judicial stance: activities related to virtual currency must be conducted within the legal framework, and stealing others' virtual property also constitutes a crime.

A man in Qingdao, China, was sentenced to 10 years and 9 months for stealing 107 BTC while "helping an acquaintance register a wallet."

Recently, the People's Procuratorate of Licang District, Qingdao City, Shandong Province, China, handled a Bitcoin theft case. The defendant, Zhang, obtained the mnemonic phrase while assisting an acquaintance in registering a virtual currency wallet, and later transferred 107 BTC in multiple transactions, equivalent to over 50 million yuan at current market prices. Zhang argued that his actions were a "protective takeover," but the prosecution found that he transferred the stolen BTC through multiple trading platforms and exchanged it for over 660,000 yuan. The Licang District Court sentenced Zhang to 10 years and 9 months in prison for theft and imposed a fine of 100,000 yuan; the second instance upheld the original judgment.Reports indicate that the prosecutor handling the case strictly adhered to laws and judicial policies, and after in-depth analysis, concluded that although China's regulatory policies deny the legal currency status of virtual currencies, they do not negate their property attributes, nor do they prohibit citizens from legally holding and circulating them. Bitcoin requires investment in computing power, funds, and other costs to acquire, which gives it economic value; rights holders can achieve exclusive control and management through private keys and mnemonic phrases, aligning with the core characteristics of "property" in criminal law, making it a target for theft. In determining the amount, since virtual currencies have no official pricing, the Licang District Procuratorate discarded market price estimates and used the actual proceeds from the crime of over 660,000 yuan as the amount for theft, ensuring accurate conviction, appropriate sentencing, and unity of guilt and punishment.

After the attack on KelpDAO, multiple protocols have abandoned LayerZero, with $4 billion in assets migrated to Chainlink CCIP

According to CoinDesk, after KelpDAO was attacked resulting in a loss of $292 million, the industry's scrutiny of the security of cross-chain infrastructure continues to heat up, with approximately $4 billion in assets having completed or currently migrating from LayerZero to Chainlink's Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP).The DeFi protocol Lombard is the latest project to join this migration trend. The protocol announced it would abandon LayerZero and migrate over $1 billion in Bitcoin-backed assets to Chainlink CCIP, stating that this decision stemmed from a comprehensive internal security review following the April attack incident.Lombard issues two types of Bitcoin-backed tokens—LBTC and BTC.b—and will prioritize the migration of assets on chains such as Solana, Etherlink, Berachain, Corn, and TAC, while terminating the use of LayerZero on Morph and Swell. Lombard stated that the reason for choosing CCIP is its independent node operators, built-in rate limiting mechanisms, and audited infrastructure. Additionally, the protocol will adopt Chainlink's cross-chain token standard to achieve asset cross-chain circulation through a burn-and-mint model.Previously, Kelp DAO, Solv Protocol, Re, and the cryptocurrency exchange Kraken have all completed similar migrations, with these projects collectively transferring approximately $4 billion in assets. Chainlink Labs Chief Business Officer Johann Eid stated, "We are witnessing a continued wave of risk-averse migration within the industry."
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.