Legal Status of Encryption Assets: Starting from a Bitcoin Robbery Case

In recent years, the development of blockchain technology has made cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum gradually known to the public. Although these assets are manifested as code and data, they inherently possess property attributes due to their value, transferability, and exclusivity. In China, although relevant regulations clearly prohibit the use and speculation of virtual currencies as legal tender, in judicial practice, virtual currencies have been widely recognized as "specific virtual goods" or "data-type property."

In the field of criminal justice, cases involving virtual currency are increasing year by year, mostly related to fraud, theft, and computer crimes. However, "robbery cases" that directly obtain virtual currency through violence or coercion are relatively rare. A Bitcoin robbery case that occurred in Yichun, Jiangxi in 2021 has become a typical case with reference significance due to its particularity and controversy.

Case Review: A Failed Bitcoin Robbery Plan

In May 2021, Lai, who suffered losses from trading coins, learned that Teacher Peng held at least 5 Bitcoins, with the price around 255,000 yuan at that time. This led him to have the idea of robbery. He posted online looking for accomplices and proactively contacted someone to get involved. The two met in Yichun and checked into a hotel, where they developed a detailed robbery plan.

To carry out the robbery, Lai prepared nylon ties and contacted other online users for help. However, the police intervened early based on the clues and arrested the two on May 11, preventing the criminal plan from being executed.

The first-instance court found that the two individuals constituted robbery, sentencing Lai to three years and Xiang to one year of imprisonment. The second-instance court, however, believed that the case belonged to the preparatory stage of robbery, which did not result in actual losses, and there was no reasonable determination of the value of Bitcoin, thus changing Lai's sentence to one year and six months, and Xiang's to nine months.

Does robbing Bitcoin constitute robbery?

The effective judgment of the court clearly confirms: it constitutes the crime of robbery.

Although Bitcoin is essentially a string of encryption data, it possesses characteristics of interchangeability, transferability, and real market value, which align with the features of "general property." The court cited relevant regulations, recognizing Bitcoin as a "specific virtual commodity" and as a "data property" that should be protected by law.

In this case, although Lai and others did not actually commit robbery, their actions constituted criminal preparation. According to relevant regulations, the court ultimately determined that their actions constituted the crime of robbery, but imposed a lighter punishment.

Sentencing Considerations for Crimes Involving Virtual Currency

In criminal cases involving virtual currency, accurately assessing value is a significant challenge. The second-instance court believes that the valuation of encryption assets should follow the "loss compensation" principle, with the actual loss of the victim as the core basis, mainly referencing the following factors:

1. The victim purchased the price ( priority applies to )
2. Price of the trading platform at the time of the incident
3. The price of stolen goods ( if any )

The court emphasized that although our country does not recognize the monetary status of Bitcoin, it has not prohibited private ownership and transfer. Therefore, the legitimate ownership of virtual assets by victims should be protected by law.

Conclusion: The Future Outlook of Legal Protection for Encryption Assets

The ruling in this case not only provides guidance for cases involving robbery of virtual currency but also indicates that the property nature of virtual currency has been widely recognized in the practice of Chinese criminal law.

Under the current legal framework, while Bitcoin and other encryption assets do not possess monetary attributes, they have significant property value. Regardless of the means used to infringe upon such assets, as long as the perpetrator aims to illegally possess them, it will be treated as a property crime.

With the in-depth development of the digital economy, criminal cases involving encryption assets will become more diverse. In the future, laws need to further clarify the legal attributes of virtual currencies, market valuation standards, and the boundaries between data and property, in order to establish more unified and stable judicial ruling rules. At the same time, relevant legal practitioners also need to continuously learn about professional knowledge in the encryption field to better serve their clients.

It is foreseeable that encryption assets will increasingly gain legal recognition and protection, and any actions that infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of their holders will also be severely investigated according to the law.