Investing in USDT is cheated and cannot be recovered! Chinese court ruling: Virtual Money writes IOUs that do not need to be repaid, illegal coin "loss is self-sufficient"

In China, a plaintiff recently invested in USDT through fren, wanting to get a high return, but could not get the return, and even the principal could not be returned. In order to recover the funds, the plaintiff signed an IOU with Fren, hoping to use this to get back the investment money, but the Tongzhou District People's Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province recently heard the case and found that TEDA Coin was illegal and not legally compensable, and rejected the plaintiff's repayment request. (Synopsis: BTC is a commodity!) A number of legal experts in China: Virtual Money has property attributes and should be protected by law) (Background supplement: Chinese courts: Virtual Money contracts are illegal gambling! BKEXexchange employee sentenced for "opening a casino") According to the China People's Court Daily, in this case, Han and Ji are fren, Ji told Han that investing in TEDA coin (USDT) is very profitable, only need to use 15,000 yuan of people's coin to buy 2,000 TEDA coins on a platform, and soon can earn more than 100,000 yuan, Han was very moved after hearing this, and readily agreed. Then Ji used Han's mobile phone to help him buy 2,000 TEDA coins on a platform, and said that he could help Han escrow, so he transferred these TEDA coins to his account, and when it came to the day when he should get income, Ji delayed in fulfilling his promise, because he couldn't even get the principal, and Han called the police. Later, Han and Ji reached an agreement to transform the previous Virtual Money transaction relationship into a borrowing relationship, and Ji issued an IOU of 15,000 yuan to Han, promising to repay Han, after which Ji still did not repay, and Han took Ji to court. Virtual Money IOUs are invalid However, after hearing, the court held that according to the "Notice on Further Preventing and Handling the Risk of Speculation in Virtual Money Transactions" issued by ten departments including the People's Bank of China, the Central Cyberspace Administration of China, and the Supreme People's Court, Virtual Money is not a coin authority, is not legally compensable, and should not and cannot be used as a coin in the market. Therefore, if any legal person, unincorporated organization and natural person invests in Virtual Money and related derivatives, contrary to public order and good customs, the relevant civil legal acts shall be invalid, and the losses arising therefrom shall be borne by them. In this case, Han claimed that in his loan with Ji, he delivered TEDA coin to Ji through an investment platform, and used this as the basis for loan delivery, but TEDA coin is not legally compensable and cannot be used as commodity coin in circulation in the market, so it cannot be regarded as Han has completed the obligation to deliver the loan in the loan protocol, so the loan protocol between the two parties is not established, and Han claims Ji's repayment according to the loan protocol. There is no factual and legal basis. Even if, as stated by Han, the money involved in the case was Ji inducing Han to invest and purchase, and transferring the purchased TEDA coin to Ji's account for escrow, the two parties formed a Virtual Money trading relationship, and later converted into a borrowing relationship through the settlement of both parties, but based on Han's negative evaluation that the funds were handed over to Ji to speculate on Virtual Money and the relevant property rights and interests were not protected by law, the people's court did not protect it. The resulting losses shall be borne by Han himself. Therefore, the court ruled to dismiss the plaintiff Han's claim according to law. Virtual Money is not protected by law is controversial It is worth noting that China has clearly announced a comprehensive ban on cryptocurrency in China since 2021, defining cryptocurrency transactions such as BTC as illegal financial activities, but in fact, there are still cryptocurrency transactions in the private sector, and there is even no lack of cryptocurrency theft and fraud. However, due to the official debate on the attribute classification of Cryptocurrency, there are also many controversies in related cases. At the end of April last year, the Nanjing Municipal People's Procuratorate, the Case Law Research Association of Jiangsu Law Society and other institutions held a research meeting entitled "Judicial Determination of Digital Goods as Criminal Objects", and many experts and scholars said that cryptocurrency such as BTC has property properties, can be classified as commodities, and should be protected by law. Guo Zhilong of the Institute of Network Law of China University of Political Science and Law argued that in the case database of the people's courts, there are many cases that recognize the property attributes of Virtual Money such as BTC, as well as the property attributes of TEDACOIN, so Virtual Money such as BTC can be property, and individual citizens can take it as the object of transaction, so the civil law and criminal law should give the necessary property protection order. Related reports Chinese can buy Hong Kong BTC ETF? Central Bank: will expand mainland investment in legal financial products in Hong Kong and Macao Chinese hackers invade the US Treasury! Treasury Secretary Yellen's computer was hacked, Musk sarcastically: she pressed BTC phishing emails Chinese actor Wang Xing went to Thailand to "turn piglets and sell them to Myanmar", is there a cryptocurrency transaction record? 〈Invest in USDT and can't get it back! Chinese court ruling: Virtual Money writes IOUs and does not have to pay back, illegal coin "bear its own losses" This article was first published in BlockTempo "Dynamic Trend - The Most Influential Block Chain News Media".