Discussion on Price Assessment Issues in the Judicial Disposal of Virtual Money

1. Introduction

With the rapid development of blockchain technology and Virtual Money, its application scope is constantly expanding. However, the anonymity, liquidity, and decentralized characteristics of Virtual Money have also made it a tool for certain illegal activities. In recent years, the number of criminal cases involving Virtual Money has surged, leading to increasingly prominent judicial disposal issues.

In judicial practice, whether price assessment is necessary for the virtual money involved in the case has become a focal point of controversy. On one hand, assessment helps clarify its value, facilitating subsequent disposal; on the other hand, due to factors such as severe market fluctuations and a lack of unified standards, assessment may trigger disputes and even touch upon regulatory red lines. This article will explore the necessity of price assessment in the judicial disposal of virtual money, analyzing its current situation and challenges.

2. Overview of Price Assessment

Price assessment usually refers to the process in criminal cases where judicial authorities commission professional third-party institutions to determine the value, attribute identification, or technical analysis of the property involved in the case. The purpose is to provide an objective and scientific basis for the investigation, prosecution, and trial of the case, ensuring that the disposal of the property involved is legal and fair. In traditional criminal cases, judicial assessment typically involves estimating the value of property and technical identification of physical evidence.

The core function of judicial evaluation lies in ensuring the fairness of judicial procedures and the reliability of evidence. Through assessments by professional institutions, authoritative reports can be obtained, reducing the arbitrariness of subjective judgment. In addition, judicial evaluation provides a quantitative basis for the disposal of involved assets, helping to achieve transparency and standardization in asset disposal. However, in the emerging field of Virtual Money, the applicability of judicial evaluation faces new challenges.

3. The Necessity of Judicial Disposition and Price Assessment of Virtual Money

(1) The Current Situation of Judicial Disposal of Virtual Money

In our country, the judicial disposal of the virtual money involved in the case is usually led by the public security organs, including sealing, confiscation, and disposal for cashing out. However, due to the uniqueness of virtual money, its disposal process faces multiple challenges: first, virtual money is stored on the blockchain network, and sealing and confiscation require technical support; second, the price is highly volatile, and the timing of disposal directly affects the outcome; finally, there is a lack of unified disposal standards, leading to significant differences in practices across regions.

In judicial practice, most criminal cases involving coins will conduct price assessments of the virtual money involved to determine its value. For example, judicial authorities commission third-party institutions to estimate the value of the virtual assets involved by referencing market conditions. However, this practice is controversial in practice: on one hand, the assessment can provide a basis for value in disposal; on the other hand, the assessment process may be questioned due to market fluctuations, the qualifications of the assessment institutions, and other issues.

(2) Analysis of the Necessity of Price Assessment

Theoretically, the price assessment of virtual money has certain significance in judicial disposal. Firstly, the assessment can clarify the value of the virtual money involved in the case, providing a basis for recovering losses; secondly, the assessment results can serve as a reference for the execution of property penalties, ensuring that the sentencing matches the proceeds of crime and protects the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved; finally, judicial assessment helps improve the transparency of disposal, avoiding judicial injustice caused by arbitrary disposal.

However, under the current regulatory framework, the necessity of evaluating the prices of Virtual Money is questionable. In September 2021, a notice jointly issued by multiple departments clearly stated that Virtual Money does not have the same legal status as fiat currency, and related trading activities are considered illegal financial activities, prohibiting any domestic institutions from providing pricing services for Virtual Money transactions. Therefore, providing pricing services for Virtual Money may be seen as indirectly supporting its trading, which carries the risk of crossing regulatory boundaries.

In addition, the price assessment of Virtual Money faces operational challenges in practice. Firstly, market prices fluctuate wildly, and the assessment results may become invalid in a short period; secondly, the qualifications of assessment agencies and the scientific nature of assessment methods are difficult to unify, leading to a lack of credibility in assessment results; finally, in criminal defense cases involving coins, price assessment reports are often difficult for the defense to accept like traditional judicial assessment reports, and may even trigger complaints and reports against the appraisal institutions.

In summary, the price assessment of Virtual Money can be implemented in judicial disposal, but it is not necessary.

4. Conclusion

Although the judicial disposal of virtual money is a niche issue, it is receiving widespread attention from both the theoretical and practical circles. However, as long as the current regulatory policies are not modified or adjusted, the price assessment involved in the judicial disposal of the virtual money cases will always find it difficult to escape the dilemma of "scratching an itch through the boot." The special attributes of virtual money determine that it cannot completely apply the model of handling the property involved in traditional criminal cases.

In the future, to promote the complete standardization of the judicial disposal of Virtual Money, efforts need to be made in the following areas: First, improve relevant laws and regulations, and regulatory policies, and clarify disposal procedures and standards; Second, strengthen technical support to enhance the judicial authorities' ability to seize and dispose of Virtual Money; Third, explore disposal models that align with international standards and learn from the experiences of other countries. Before regulatory policies are relaxed, while the price assessment of Virtual Money has theoretical value, it should be implemented cautiously in practice to avoid crossing regulatory red lines. Only through the joint promotion of policies, technology, and practice can the judicial disposal of Virtual Money gradually mature.