2026-01-20 14:23:05

A Shenzhen programmer's Bitcoin seizure incident has recently attracted widespread attention in the entire crypto community. The case has changed charges three times, from initially "running a gambling operation," to "illegally obtaining computer information system data," and finally settling on "theft" plus "infringement of citizens' personal information." The process itself is quite thought-provoking.

Here's what happened: The involved individual, Li Dong, is an 80s-born cybersecurity engineer. The prosecution claims that in 2020, he exploited vulnerabilities in overseas online gambling servers to steal personal information of 1.84 million Chinese citizens and embezzled 35.5 million yuan in website agent rebates. Because of this, his digital assets were seized by judicial authorities.

The seizure situation is somewhat complex—Hunan Zhangjiajie police seized 103 Bitcoins, which have already been liquidated for 49.61 million yuan; Henan Changge police seized 80 Bitcoins, valued at about 40 million yuan. In total, 183 Bitcoins, worth over 90 million yuan. For ordinary people, this is an astronomical amount.

The most heartbreaking part is that after Li Dong was released on bail pending trial, Zhangjiajie police directly liquidated those 103 Bitcoins. But the problem is— the case is still under trial, charges have been changed three times, and no final verdict has been issued yet. This raises a very practical question: what does it mean for the defendant when digital assets are liquidated before a verdict is reached?

On January 5, 2026, the Changge City Court publicly tried the case. The defense argued for innocence, claiming that the actions against illegal websites do not constitute theft. The case is currently in recess, awaiting the court's scheduled announcement.

This case exposes a risk point that all cryptocurrency holders tend to overlook: once involved in judicial procedures, your digital assets may face seizure and liquidation, and this process can be much faster than the legal verdict. For holders, this is not only a legal issue but also an asset security concern.

BTC-3,81%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ForkItAll

· 6h ago

Changing the charges three times is really incredible. The court hasn't even reached a verdict, yet the assets are being liquidated? Isn't this pushing people to the brink of death? The money is being converted before the judgment is even out, this logic is truly absurd. Over 90 million just gone like that, anyone would go crazy. The key is still the innocent defense. Digital assets really have no protection in the face of domestic judicial systems. We need to be more cautious with holding coins. How is this guy so unlucky? Facing such a situation, he must be furious. The case is still in adjournment until 2026, this progress is really... slow enough. Holding coins isn't just risky because of price drops; legal issues are the real killer. They changed the charges but haven't reached a verdict yet. What are they doing? The trial standard is a bit worrying. 183 Bitcoins were liquidated by the authorities just like that. Do we still dare to hold? That operation in Zhangjiajie was really an "advance judgment overdraft." Who can accept this?

View OriginalReply0

GhostInTheChain

· 7h ago

The charges were changed three times? That's outrageous, and the verdict hasn't even been announced yet, but the coins are gone. Cash out before the verdict, this move is truly bold. 90 million just evaporated like that, it's heartbreaking. This guy is probably innocent and is being wrongfully accused; even his innocence defense is ready. People in the crypto circle need to learn how to hide assets, or else they'll end up like this. Can bail be cashed out directly? There are definitely loopholes in the law. Wait, does this logic hold? Isn't the behavior of illegal websites considered theft? The biggest risk for coin holders is actually here; I never thought of this before. 183 Bitcoins vanished instantly, serving as a warning to coin holders.

View OriginalReply0

MechanicalMartel

· 7h ago

Changing charges three times—who can handle that... They haven't even been convicted before selling coins, and now they're just cashing out. The logic is really insane.

View OriginalReply0

MonkeySeeMonkeyDo

· 7h ago

Charges changed three times? That's a bit outrageous. The verdict hasn't even come out yet and it's already liquidated... Quick liquidation, slow verdict, now that's a big problem. Over 90 million, really outrageous, found not guilty? Feels like they acted first and reported later... How come the seizure happened so quickly? Digital assets are really a pitfall in the country. This guy got into trouble, even bail didn't help. Illegal websites are indeed a bit blurry, but it's not really our concern. The verdict is far away, and the coins are already gone, that's just outrageous. 183 Bitcoins, just thinking about it hurts... Brother Dong really hit a landmine this time.

View OriginalReply0