Hunan

A dispute arose over virtual currency trading, and the Hunan court dismissed the plaintiff buyer's lawsuit request

ChainCatcher news, according to Legal Network reports, the People's Court of Yuanjiang City, Hunan Province recently heard a dispute case arising from the buying and selling of virtual currency.In this case, Zhou approached his friend Dai, hoping to help him purchase the encrypted virtual currency BZZ for investment. Consequently, Dai, entrusted by Zhou, purchased BZZ virtual currency from Zheng and sent the virtual currency to Zhou's imtoken wallet. However, after some time, Zhou sued Zheng in court, demanding the return of the funds he used to purchase BZZ virtual currency, amounting to 76,518 yuan, and payment for the funds' occupation fee.After hearing the case, the court held that civil subjects engaging in civil activities must not violate legal provisions and must not go against public order and good customs. BZZ is a type of network virtual currency similar to Bitcoin, which does not have legal tender status and should not and cannot be circulated as currency in the market. Activities related to virtual currency are considered illegal financial activities, and citizens participating in virtual currency transactions must bear their own investment risks. The entrusted transactions, management, and related refund actions concerning BZZ among Zhou, Zheng, and Dai are currently not protected by law in our country, and the consequences of such actions should be borne by themselves. Zhou's request for Zheng to return the funds used to purchase BZZ virtual currency, amounting to 76,518 yuan, and to pay the funds' occupation fee lacks factual and legal basis, thus the court ultimately ruled to dismiss Zhou's lawsuit.

A man in Changsha, Hunan spent 1.65 million to rent a server for "mining" and was scammed

ChainCatcher news reports that the Intermediate People's Court of Changsha City, Hunan Province, has released a typical case involving the environmental resource trial of virtual currency "mining."The plaintiff, Luo, signed three contracts with the defendant, a company in Hunan. The contracts stipulated that the defendant company would provide Luo with 5 servers for a total price of 1.65 million yuan; the defendant company promised that the "mining" profits would not be lower than the average level across the network, and if any penalties were incurred due to technical issues, the company would bear the corresponding losses. After the contracts were signed, Luo paid the actual owner of the defendant company, Fan, 1.65 million yuan in installments as required by the contract. However, Fan and his company failed to deliver the server equipment and software system to Luo, nor did they provide any investment returns as promised. Luo filed a lawsuit in court seeking to terminate the contract and claim damages.The Tianxin District Court of Changsha City determined that the contracts signed by both parties were invalid due to violation of public order and good morals. The defendant company incurred a cost of 60,000 yuan for renting cabinets from an external company, and considering that both parties were at fault regarding the invalidity of the contract, this loss should be borne equally by both parties, resulting in each party bearing 30,000 yuan. The defendant company in Hunan had received 1.65 million yuan from the plaintiff and should return 1.62 million yuan to the plaintiff; defendant Fan is jointly liable for the payment obligations of his company in Hunan; and Luo's other claims were dismissed.
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovators