1. Introduction
With the rapid development of blockchain technology and virtual currency, virtual currency is increasingly widely used around the world. However, advantages and disadvantages come with it. The anonymity, liquidity and decentralization of virtual currency make it a tool for criminal activities such as money laundering, online casinos, and illegal fundraising. The number of criminal cases involving virtual currency that are solved, prosecuted and tried in my country each year is also increasing. As a result, the issue of disposal and liquidation (judicial disposal) of virtual currency in criminal cases has gradually become prominent.
In judicial practice, whether it is necessary to conduct a price evaluation for the judicial disposal of virtual currencies involved in the case has become a controversial issue for some people. On the one hand, price evaluation helps to clarify the value of the virtual currencies involved in the case and facilitates subsequent disposal; on the other hand, the price evaluation of virtual currencies may cause controversy due to drastic market fluctuations and lack of unified standards, and may even touch the regulatory red line. The author of this article (web3_lawyer) will discuss the necessity of price evaluation in the judicial disposal of virtual currencies and analyze its current status and challenges.
2. What is price evaluation?
Price evaluation generally refers to the process in which the judicial authorities entrust a professional third-party organization to conduct value identification, attribute identification or technical analysis of the property involved in a criminal case. Its purpose is to provide an objective and scientific basis for the investigation, prosecution and trial of the case, and to ensure that the disposal of the property involved is legal and fair. In criminal cases, judicial evaluation usually involves the estimation of the value of property and the technical identification of physical evidence. For example, for traditional property such as real estate and vehicles involved in the case, judicial evaluation can clarify its market value and provide a reference for the recovery of stolen goods and losses, and the execution of property penalties.
The core role of judicial evaluation is to ensure the fairness of judicial procedures and the reliability of evidence. Through the evaluation of professional institutions, judicial organs can obtain authoritative evaluation reports and reduce the arbitrariness of subjective judgments. In addition, judicial evaluation also provides a quantitative basis for the disposal of property involved in the case, which helps to achieve transparency and standardization of property disposal. However, in the emerging field of judicial disposal of virtual currency, the applicability of judicial evaluation faces new challenges.
III. Necessity of Judicial Disposal and Price Evaluation of Virtual Currency
1. Current status of judicial disposal of virtual currency
In my country, the judicial disposal of virtual currencies involved in cases is usually led by public security organs, and the disposal methods include sealing, seizure, disposal and realization. However, due to the particularity of virtual currencies, its disposal process faces multiple difficulties. First, virtual currencies are stored in the blockchain network, and sealing and seizure require technical support; second, the price of virtual currencies fluctuates violently, and the choice of disposal timing directly affects the disposal effect; finally, the lack of unified disposal standards leads to large differences in local practices.
In judicial practice, in most criminal cases involving currency, the price of the virtual currency involved is evaluated to determine its value. For example, the judicial authorities entrust a third-party agency to evaluate the Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tether, etc. involved in the case with reference to market conditions. However, this practice is controversial in practice: on the one hand, price evaluation can provide a value basis for disposal; on the other hand, the evaluation process may be questioned due to market fluctuations, the qualifications of the evaluation agency, and other issues.
(II) Necessity analysis of price evaluation
Theoretically, the price evaluation of virtual currency has certain significance in judicial disposal. First, the evaluation can clarify the value of the virtual currency involved in the case and provide a basis for recovering the stolen money and losses; second, the evaluation results can be used as a reference for the execution of property penalties to ensure that the sentencing matches the proceeds of the crime and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties; finally, judicial evaluation helps to improve the transparency of disposal and avoid judicial injustice caused by arbitrary disposal.
However, under the current regulatory framework in my country, the necessity of virtual currency price evaluation is questionable. On September 15, 2021, the "Notice on Further Preventing and Dealing with the Risks of Virtual Currency Trading Speculation" (hereinafter referred to as the "9.24 Notice") issued by ten departments including the Ministry of Public Security, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Supreme People's Court, and the People's Bank of China clearly pointed out that virtual currency does not have the same legal status as legal currency, and related trading activities are illegal financial activities. Any domestic institution is prohibited from providing pricing services for virtual currency transactions. Therefore, providing pricing services for virtual currencies may be regarded as disguised support for virtual currency transactions, which poses a risk of touching the regulatory red line.
In addition, virtual currency price evaluation faces operational difficulties in practice. First, the virtual currency market price fluctuates violently, and the evaluation results may become invalid in a short period of time; second, it is difficult to unify the qualifications of the evaluation agency and the scientific nature of the evaluation method, resulting in a lack of credibility in the evaluation results; finally, in criminal defense involving currency, even if the price evaluation is accepted and adopted by the prosecution as material for accusing the parties of suspected crimes, this evaluation report is difficult to be accepted by the defense like a traditional judicial evaluation report, and may even trigger complaints and reports from the defense against the appraisal agency.
Through the above analysis, the author believes that price evaluation of virtual currency can be implemented in judicial disposal, but it is not necessary.
IV. Conclusion
Although the judicial disposal of virtual currency is a very niche practical issue, it is currently receiving widespread attention from the theoretical and practical circles. In recent years, academic forums and seminars on the disposal of virtual currency have been held continuously, and scholars have conducted in-depth discussions on the disposal process, regulatory policies and technical support. However, the author's point of view is that as long as the regulatory policies represented by the "9.24 Notice" are not modified or adjusted, the price evaluation in the judicial disposal of virtual currency involved in the case (even in the entire criminal case involving currency) will always be difficult to get rid of the dilemma of "scratching the itch through the shoe". The special attributes of virtual currency determine that it cannot fully apply the model of property disposal involved in traditional criminal cases.
In the future, if we want to promote the complete standardization of the judicial disposal of virtual currency, we need to make efforts in the following aspects: first, improve relevant laws, regulations and regulatory policies, and clarify the procedures and standards for the judicial disposal of virtual currency; second, strengthen technical support and enhance the judicial organs' ability to seal and dispose of virtual currency; third, explore a disposal model that is in line with international standards and learn from the experience of other countries (for example, directly nationalize the virtual currency involved in the case, but the premise of doing so must be to clearly recognize the value attributes of virtual currency and weaken the negative attitude towards the "non-monetization" of virtual currency). Before the regulatory policy is loosened, the price evaluation of virtual currency has theoretical value, but it should be implemented cautiously in practice to avoid touching the regulatory red line. Only with the joint promotion of policies, technologies and practices can the judicial disposal of virtual currency gradually mature.
