4,84
09-07-2025
3599
7 min.
⚖️ Legal aspects of protecting the rights of crypto investors in cases of asset theft
This material was prepared in collaboration with Ilya Korneev, a lawyer at Buzko Krasnov. We combined our expertise to demonstrate how cryptocurrency is recognized as an object of law and how this recognition affects criminal investigations and civil claims.
Get advice from AML Crypto experts
Recently, at AML Crypto, we have been receiving an increasing number of requests from victims of cryptocurrency-related crimes. Most often, these are citizens of Russia and other post-Soviet countries. The victims usually have little understanding of which legal mechanisms actually work and how assets can be recovered.
- 📌 ImportantlyEven in the absence of well-established case law regarding crypto assets, the protection of rights is still possible. We recommend adopting a proactive approach, including filing applications simultaneously in multiple jurisdictions. In a number of cases, this significantly increases the chances of asset recovery and elicits a response from exchanges.
🇷🇺 The Status of Cryptocurrency in the Russian Federation
At present, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not directly define the place of cryptocurrency among objects of civil rights. A special law, Federal Law No. 259-FZ of July 31, 2020 ("On Digital Financial Assets…"), introduced the category of "digital currency" and established restrictions on its use. Formally, digital currency is recognized as property only in certain branches of law (for example, in tax law, anti-money laundering legislation, bankruptcy, and enforcement proceedings).
- 📄 In August 2025, a new version of the draft law was published, which recognizes digital currency as property for the purposes of criminal and criminal procedure law and introduces procedures for its seizure and confiscation.
Despite the fragmented regulation of cryptocurrencies in Russia, judicial practice has long proceeded from the recognition of cryptocurrency as property and provides legal protection of the corresponding rights. As early as 2018−2019, courts began including crypto assets in the bankruptcy estate of debtors and considering claims involving cryptocurrency under the general norms of civil law. In the criminal law sphere, questions remained until recently due to the absence of an explicit recognition of cryptocurrency as property. However, the practical need to protect victims compelled law enforcement and courts to apply analogies with traditional objects of property.
📜 Criminal classification of cryptocurrency theft
Previously, some courts expressed doubts as to whether cryptocurrency could be considered the subject of theft. A well-known example is the judgment of the Petrogradsky District Court of St. Petersburg of June 30, 2020, in case No. 1−95/2020, which excluded from the charges episodes related to the robbery of cryptocurrency, stating that cryptocurrency did not constitute "property" within the meaning of the criminal law. However, this decision was later overturned by a higher court, and current practice has since converged toward a unified approach. Theft of crypto assets is now classified by analogy with crimes involving other types of property, under various provisions of the Russian Criminal Code. Below are the possible criminal offenses and examples of court decisions.
📜 Article 158 of the Russian Criminal Code — THEFT
There is not yet widespread practice of applying Article 158 of the Criminal Code to cases of cryptocurrency theft. Publicly available sources confirm only one such case - a 2022 case involving the theft of 7,000 ETH, of which more than 4,000 ETH remained by the time of the investigation. The charges were brought under Part 2 of Article 272 of the Criminal Code (unauthorized access to computer information) and Paragraph "b" of Part 4 of Article 158 (theft on an especially large scale).
The court recognized cryptocurrency as "other property" on the basis of the note to Article 158, which for the first time made it possible to impose seizure on crypto assets. This precedent effectively established the possibility of treating cryptocurrency theft as theft in the full legal sense, with all resulting consequences.
There is not yet widespread practice of applying Article 158 of the Criminal Code to cases of cryptocurrency theft. Publicly available sources confirm only one such case - a 2022 case involving the theft of 7,000 ETH, of which more than 4,000 ETH remained by the time of the investigation. The charges were brought under Part 2 of Article 272 of the Criminal Code (unauthorized access to computer information) and Paragraph "b" of Part 4 of Article 158 (theft on an especially large scale).
The court recognized cryptocurrency as "other property" on the basis of the note to Article 158, which for the first time made it possible to impose seizure on crypto assets. This precedent effectively established the possibility of treating cryptocurrency theft as theft in the full legal sense, with all resulting consequences.
📜 Article 159 of the Russian Criminal Code — FRAUD
The judgment of the Presnensky District Court of Moscow of June 24, 2025, in the case of Valeria Fedyakina (known as "Bitmama") became a landmark example of qualifying a pseudo-investment scheme involving cryptocurrency as fraud. Fedyakina offered investors opportunities to invest in cryptocurrency under guarantees of high returns, but in reality misappropriated the funds.
The court found her guilty under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code (fraud on an especially large scale). The total damages were estimated at approximately 2.2 billion rubles, and in order to secure compensation, the court seized the defendant’s accounts and assets.
This case confirms that fraudulent schemes involving crypto investments are prosecuted on the same basis as traditional financial pyramids.
The judgment of the Presnensky District Court of Moscow of June 24, 2025, in the case of Valeria Fedyakina (known as "Bitmama") became a landmark example of qualifying a pseudo-investment scheme involving cryptocurrency as fraud. Fedyakina offered investors opportunities to invest in cryptocurrency under guarantees of high returns, but in reality misappropriated the funds.
The court found her guilty under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code (fraud on an especially large scale). The total damages were estimated at approximately 2.2 billion rubles, and in order to secure compensation, the court seized the defendant’s accounts and assets.
This case confirms that fraudulent schemes involving crypto investments are prosecuted on the same basis as traditional financial pyramids.
📜 Article 159.6 of the Russian Criminal Code — FRAUD IN THE SPHERE OF COMPUTER INFORMATION
This provision applies where deception is connected with IT infrastructure. For example, in 2024 the Dorogomilovsky District Court of Moscow delivered a judgment in a case involving phishing "crypto exchanges." The perpetrators created fake exchange websites, stole logins and access keys, and then withdrew cryptocurrency from the victims' accounts.
The criminal acts were classified under Article 159.6 of the Criminal Code (fraud in the sphere of computer information), in conjunction with Article 272 (unauthorized access to computer information) and Article 273 (creation and use of malicious software).
Such judgments demonstrate the courts' readiness to apply specialized cybercrime provisions to the theft of crypto assets, where the scheme involves hacking or phishing.
This provision applies where deception is connected with IT infrastructure. For example, in 2024 the Dorogomilovsky District Court of Moscow delivered a judgment in a case involving phishing "crypto exchanges." The perpetrators created fake exchange websites, stole logins and access keys, and then withdrew cryptocurrency from the victims' accounts.
The criminal acts were classified under Article 159.6 of the Criminal Code (fraud in the sphere of computer information), in conjunction with Article 272 (unauthorized access to computer information) and Article 273 (creation and use of malicious software).
Such judgments demonstrate the courts' readiness to apply specialized cybercrime provisions to the theft of crypto assets, where the scheme involves hacking or phishing.
📜 Article 160 of the Russian Criminal Code — MISAPPROPRIATION OR EMBEZZLEMENT
In 2023, the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow considered the case of Alexey Ivanov (Bilyuchenko), one of the administrators of the WEX exchange. Together with accomplices, he misappropriated clients' cryptocurrency assets worth more than 3 billion rubles by blocking access to their wallets and effectively stealing investors' funds.
The court classified Ivanov’s actions under Part 4 of Article 160 of the Criminal Code — misappropriation on an especially large scale. He was sentenced to 3.5 years of imprisonment and fined 3.1 billion rubles, corresponding to the amount of damages suffered by investors.
This was the first final criminal conviction in Russia for the misappropriation of cryptocurrency on such a scale.
In 2023, the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow considered the case of Alexey Ivanov (Bilyuchenko), one of the administrators of the WEX exchange. Together with accomplices, he misappropriated clients' cryptocurrency assets worth more than 3 billion rubles by blocking access to their wallets and effectively stealing investors' funds.
The court classified Ivanov’s actions under Part 4 of Article 160 of the Criminal Code — misappropriation on an especially large scale. He was sentenced to 3.5 years of imprisonment and fined 3.1 billion rubles, corresponding to the amount of damages suffered by investors.
This was the first final criminal conviction in Russia for the misappropriation of cryptocurrency on such a scale.
📜 Articles 161−163 of the Russian Criminal Code — ROBBERY, ARMED ROBBERY, AND EXTORTION
Judicial practice in qualifying the theft of cryptocurrency shows that the decisive factors are the moment of acquisition and the nature of the threats involved. If property is taken immediately after the use of violence or threats, the act is classified as robbery (Article 161) or armed robbery (Article 162, if the threats are dangerous to life or health). If, however, the demand concerns the transfer of assets in the future, the crime is treated as extortion (Article 163).
A notable example is the previously discussed case No. 1−95/2020 in St. Petersburg: the trial court initially classified the actions as extortion, but the appellate and cassation courts reclassified them as robbery, noting that the violence was used as a means of immediate seizure of cash. The episode involving cryptocurrency was excluded at the time, as digital currency was not then recognized as an object of theft.
In 2023, the Leninsky District Court of Omsk considered a "mixed" case: for several months the defendant threatened the victim with demands to transfer bitcoins, and later, together with accomplices, broke into his home armed with stun guns. The court classified the actions simultaneously under Paragraph "b" of Part 4 of Article 162 (armed robbery on an especially large scale) and Paragraph "a" of Part 3 of Article 163 (extortion involving violence), imposing a lengthy prison sentence.
Judicial practice in qualifying the theft of cryptocurrency shows that the decisive factors are the moment of acquisition and the nature of the threats involved. If property is taken immediately after the use of violence or threats, the act is classified as robbery (Article 161) or armed robbery (Article 162, if the threats are dangerous to life or health). If, however, the demand concerns the transfer of assets in the future, the crime is treated as extortion (Article 163).
A notable example is the previously discussed case No. 1−95/2020 in St. Petersburg: the trial court initially classified the actions as extortion, but the appellate and cassation courts reclassified them as robbery, noting that the violence was used as a means of immediate seizure of cash. The episode involving cryptocurrency was excluded at the time, as digital currency was not then recognized as an object of theft.
In 2023, the Leninsky District Court of Omsk considered a "mixed" case: for several months the defendant threatened the victim with demands to transfer bitcoins, and later, together with accomplices, broke into his home armed with stun guns. The court classified the actions simultaneously under Paragraph "b" of Part 4 of Article 162 (armed robbery on an especially large scale) and Paragraph "a" of Part 3 of Article 163 (extortion involving violence), imposing a lengthy prison sentence.
These cases clearly demonstrate that violent methods of seizing cryptocurrency are treated in the same way as attacks on other types of property and entail equally severe criminal liability.
💸 Procedure for the Seizure and Confiscation of Crypto Assets in Criminal Proceedings
📌 Current practice
Once a criminal case is initiated, the investigator petitions the court to impose an attachment on digital assets (Article 115 of the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure). Only the court may order the seizure of property, and the petition must be reviewed within 24 hours of submission (Part 3 of Article 165 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). In practice, courts recognize cryptocurrency as property and, where necessary, classify it as physical evidence (Article 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). If investigators gain access to the defendant’s crypto wallet, the assets are transferred to a specially created wallet under law enforcement control. If access is unavailable or the defendant refuses to cooperate, devices (computers, phones, hardware wallets) are seized, after which specialists attempt to restore access (e.g., by breaking a password or obtaining keys) and transfer the funds to a controlled address. There is currently no direct procedural regulation of these steps-the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure on seizure and attachment of property are applied.
Challenges. The difficulty with the current procedure is that cryptocurrency is a decentralized asset, and there is no single authority capable of freezing or seizing funds without access to private keys. Much therefore depends on the speed of response: promptly freezing accounts on exchanges or wallets, before criminals can "split" or cash out the assets, is critically important. Nevertheless, enforcement practice is gradually developing approaches, and even in the absence of special regulations, investigators generally manage to identify, secure, and seize crypto assets during investigations-with the assistance of technical experts and through international requests to cryptocurrency exchanges.
Once a criminal case is initiated, the investigator petitions the court to impose an attachment on digital assets (Article 115 of the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure). Only the court may order the seizure of property, and the petition must be reviewed within 24 hours of submission (Part 3 of Article 165 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). In practice, courts recognize cryptocurrency as property and, where necessary, classify it as physical evidence (Article 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). If investigators gain access to the defendant’s crypto wallet, the assets are transferred to a specially created wallet under law enforcement control. If access is unavailable or the defendant refuses to cooperate, devices (computers, phones, hardware wallets) are seized, after which specialists attempt to restore access (e.g., by breaking a password or obtaining keys) and transfer the funds to a controlled address. There is currently no direct procedural regulation of these steps-the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure on seizure and attachment of property are applied.
Challenges. The difficulty with the current procedure is that cryptocurrency is a decentralized asset, and there is no single authority capable of freezing or seizing funds without access to private keys. Much therefore depends on the speed of response: promptly freezing accounts on exchanges or wallets, before criminals can "split" or cash out the assets, is critically important. Nevertheless, enforcement practice is gradually developing approaches, and even in the absence of special regulations, investigators generally manage to identify, secure, and seize crypto assets during investigations-with the assistance of technical experts and through international requests to cryptocurrency exchanges.
📌 What Will Change After Amendments to the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure
Under the draft law published in August 2025, digital currency will be explicitly recognized as property for the purposes of criminal and criminal procedure law. The draft also introduces a clear procedural mechanism for the seizure of crypto assets. In particular, it is envisaged that, upon the investigator’s request, the court will impose an attachment on cryptocurrency, after which the transfer of assets will be recorded to a special address-identifier designated by the competent authority.
The draft law further establishes rules for the storage of cryptocurrency, its status as physical evidence, and its subsequent confiscation following a conviction. In this way, the proposed amendments effectively codify techniques already in use (such as transfers to controlled wallets, seizure of hardware wallets, etc.) and create a uniform, transparent procedure for the entire law enforcement system.
Under the draft law published in August 2025, digital currency will be explicitly recognized as property for the purposes of criminal and criminal procedure law. The draft also introduces a clear procedural mechanism for the seizure of crypto assets. In particular, it is envisaged that, upon the investigator’s request, the court will impose an attachment on cryptocurrency, after which the transfer of assets will be recorded to a special address-identifier designated by the competent authority.
The draft law further establishes rules for the storage of cryptocurrency, its status as physical evidence, and its subsequent confiscation following a conviction. In this way, the proposed amendments effectively codify techniques already in use (such as transfers to controlled wallets, seizure of hardware wallets, etc.) and create a uniform, transparent procedure for the entire law enforcement system.
🙋 Civil Law Remedies
Regardless of criminal prosecution, a victim has the right to initiate a civil claim against the perpetrator in order to recover lost assets. Two main options are available:
- 📄 Claim for Unjust Enrichment (Article 1102 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation)This applies if crypto assets were voluntarily transferred to the wrongdoer under certain promises (e.g., investment with guaranteed returns) that were not fulfilled. Since the counter-performance did not occur, the enrichment is deemed unjustified, and the victim may demand restitution. To succeed, it is sufficient to prove the transfer of crypto assets to the defendant and the absence of any legal grounds for retaining them. A key advantage is that the plaintiff does not need to prove the defendant’s fault-only the fact of unjust enrichment.
- 📄 Claim for Damages (Article 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation)This applies if the assets were unlawfully taken (theft, fraud, etc.). Here, the plaintiff refers to the pecuniary damage caused by the crime and seeks compensation equivalent to the stolen cryptocurrency. To succeed, the plaintiff must prove the unlawful act, the defendant’s fault, and the amount of damages. In addition to direct losses, the plaintiff may also claim lost profits. For example, if it can be substantiated that the value of the cryptocurrency increased during the period of deprivation, the difference may be claimed as lost profit. Of course, courts treat hypothetical earnings with skepticism, so such claims are satisfied only with a convincing evidentiary basis.
In practice, both grounds are often stated alternatively in the claim. The plaintiff requests the court to recover the amount either as unjust enrichment or as damages-at the court’s discretion. This increases the likelihood that the claim will be granted under at least one of the grounds. Courts, after reviewing the case materials, themselves determine which norm is more applicable. For instance, if the fact of a crime is not proven (important for Article 1064), but it is evident that the funds were transferred without any counter-performance, the court may order recovery under unjust enrichment. Thus, civil law mechanisms allow victims to recover lost crypto assets even in cases where criminal proceedings are delayed or do not result in actual compensation.
In 2024, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation emphasized that, when resolving disputes concerning the return of cryptocurrency, the court must establish to whom the relevant wallet belongs; failure to do so renders the judicial act unlawful. In practice, proof of ownership is established through correspondence, notarial inspection protocols, data from applications or exchanges, and blockchain analytics.
In 2024, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation emphasized that, when resolving disputes concerning the return of cryptocurrency, the court must establish to whom the relevant wallet belongs; failure to do so renders the judicial act unlawful. In practice, proof of ownership is established through correspondence, notarial inspection protocols, data from applications or exchanges, and blockchain analytics.
🌏 Regulation in Post-Soviet Countries
In most former USSR states, the approaches to criminal offenses involving crypto assets are largely similar, despite differences in legislation. The theft of cryptocurrency is typically qualified under general provisions of the criminal code (theft, fraud, embezzlement, robbery, etc.), often in combination with articles relating to cybercrime. For civil law protection, the same two mechanisms described above are used-either a claim for unjust enrichment in cases of voluntary transfer without counter-performance, or a claim for damages.
🇧🇾 Belarus
Belarus has a special legal regime in the High-Tech Park (HTP), established by Presidential Decree No. 8 "On the Development of the Digital Economy" of December 21, 2017. Within this regime, the circulation of tokens has been legalized, creating a normative basis for recognizing cryptocurrency as property and applying general rules on seizure and confiscation. Criminal cases involving cryptocurrency theft are classified under standard provisions-theft, fraud, robbery, extortion.
A striking recent case involved the robbery and extortion of 5,750 BTC from an IT specialist in Minsk. The perpetrators, posing as electricians, broke into the victim’s apartment, tortured him with a stun gun, and demanded the transfer of 5,750 bitcoins. Ultimately, one of the attackers was arrested and sentenced to 13 years in a high-security colony. Public sources mention a conviction and a substantial fine, though there is no information regarding civil compensation for the victim. Nevertheless, the very existence of such a case confirms that Belarusian courts recognize crypto assets as property and that law enforcement agencies are capable of investigating and prosecuting crypto-related crimes on par with traditional ones.
Belarus has a special legal regime in the High-Tech Park (HTP), established by Presidential Decree No. 8 "On the Development of the Digital Economy" of December 21, 2017. Within this regime, the circulation of tokens has been legalized, creating a normative basis for recognizing cryptocurrency as property and applying general rules on seizure and confiscation. Criminal cases involving cryptocurrency theft are classified under standard provisions-theft, fraud, robbery, extortion.
A striking recent case involved the robbery and extortion of 5,750 BTC from an IT specialist in Minsk. The perpetrators, posing as electricians, broke into the victim’s apartment, tortured him with a stun gun, and demanded the transfer of 5,750 bitcoins. Ultimately, one of the attackers was arrested and sentenced to 13 years in a high-security colony. Public sources mention a conviction and a substantial fine, though there is no information regarding civil compensation for the victim. Nevertheless, the very existence of such a case confirms that Belarusian courts recognize crypto assets as property and that law enforcement agencies are capable of investigating and prosecuting crypto-related crimes on par with traditional ones.
🇦🇲 Armenia
On July 4, 2025, the Law of the Republic of Armenia HO-159-N "On Crypto Assets" entered into force, establishing the country’s first comprehensive legal framework for the cryptocurrency market. The law directly regulates the public offering of crypto assets, the activities of service providers, and introduces the licensing of such companies through the Central Bank. This regime has given law enforcement specific points of entry: authorities may now submit requests to the regulator and licensed exchanges to block or seize assets in the course of investigations.
In 2023, the first criminal case involving the theft of 129 ETH was investigated-remarkably, the defendant fully compensated the victim for the damages during the investigation.
On July 4, 2025, the Law of the Republic of Armenia HO-159-N "On Crypto Assets" entered into force, establishing the country’s first comprehensive legal framework for the cryptocurrency market. The law directly regulates the public offering of crypto assets, the activities of service providers, and introduces the licensing of such companies through the Central Bank. This regime has given law enforcement specific points of entry: authorities may now submit requests to the regulator and licensed exchanges to block or seize assets in the course of investigations.
In 2023, the first criminal case involving the theft of 129 ETH was investigated-remarkably, the defendant fully compensated the victim for the damages during the investigation.
🇬🇪 Georgia
Cryptocurrency is not officially recognized as legal tender in Georgia; however, the crypto services market is regulated. On July 1, 2023, the Rules for the Registration, Deregistration, and Regulation of Virtual Asset Service Providers (Order of the President of the National Bank of Georgia No. 94/04 of June 13, 2023) came into effect. All local crypto exchanges and exchangers are now required to register with the NBG, creating a transparent supervisory mechanism. This regime provides law enforcement with a clear channel for cooperation: registered providers can be promptly requested to provide information and block suspicious accounts.
In 2025, Georgian courts classified the actions of a fund manager who misappropriated a large amount of cryptocurrency-more than 8,000 BTC-as both a property crime and money laundering. In August 2025, the Tbilisi Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. Although the theft itself occurred back in 2015−2017, the new regulatory framework enabled cryptocurrency to be treated as property and as the subject of a crime, thereby solidifying its legal status in criminal proceedings.
Cryptocurrency is not officially recognized as legal tender in Georgia; however, the crypto services market is regulated. On July 1, 2023, the Rules for the Registration, Deregistration, and Regulation of Virtual Asset Service Providers (Order of the President of the National Bank of Georgia No. 94/04 of June 13, 2023) came into effect. All local crypto exchanges and exchangers are now required to register with the NBG, creating a transparent supervisory mechanism. This regime provides law enforcement with a clear channel for cooperation: registered providers can be promptly requested to provide information and block suspicious accounts.
In 2025, Georgian courts classified the actions of a fund manager who misappropriated a large amount of cryptocurrency-more than 8,000 BTC-as both a property crime and money laundering. In August 2025, the Tbilisi Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. Although the theft itself occurred back in 2015−2017, the new regulatory framework enabled cryptocurrency to be treated as property and as the subject of a crime, thereby solidifying its legal status in criminal proceedings.
🇰🇬 Kyrgyzstan
In the Kyrgyz Republic, Law No. 12 of January 21, 2022, introduced the concept of "virtual assets" and established a licensing regime for operators of such assets. The creation of this formal perimeter allowed regulators to lawfully oversee the activities of crypto companies and cooperate with them during investigations.
A telling case is the scandal surrounding the cryptocurrency pyramid scheme MCN Coin. In early 2024, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the financial intelligence unit discovered that MCN Coin had been operating without registration and had solicited funds from thousands of citizens. A criminal case for fraud was initiated, and the organizers were detained. During the investigation, approximately USD 1.7 million-nearly half of the invested funds-was returned to victims. These funds were recovered through financial supervision: once the unregistered asset scheme was identified, the FIU transferred the materials to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and joint efforts allowed assets to be frozen and partially returned.
In the Kyrgyz Republic, Law No. 12 of January 21, 2022, introduced the concept of "virtual assets" and established a licensing regime for operators of such assets. The creation of this formal perimeter allowed regulators to lawfully oversee the activities of crypto companies and cooperate with them during investigations.
A telling case is the scandal surrounding the cryptocurrency pyramid scheme MCN Coin. In early 2024, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the financial intelligence unit discovered that MCN Coin had been operating without registration and had solicited funds from thousands of citizens. A criminal case for fraud was initiated, and the organizers were detained. During the investigation, approximately USD 1.7 million-nearly half of the invested funds-was returned to victims. These funds were recovered through financial supervision: once the unregistered asset scheme was identified, the FIU transferred the materials to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and joint efforts allowed assets to be frozen and partially returned.
🇰🇿 Kazakhstan
The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-VII ZRK "On Digital Assets in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of February 6, 2023, established a model under which the trading and custody of unsecured digital assets are permitted only on licensed platforms of the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC), under the supervision of the regulator. Outside the AIFC perimeter, exchanges and exchangers are illegal; thus, the AIFC infrastructure serves as the primary legal channel for law enforcement requests and asset freezes.
In 2024, the Financial Monitoring Agency traced and recovered crypto assets from the Eolus pyramid scheme: approximately USD 520,000 was transferred to the agency’s special account for victim compensation, and the court additionally confiscated 408,000 USDT. This demonstrated that under the current model, not only are seizure and confiscation possible, but asset recovery for victims is also effectively ensured.
The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-VII ZRK "On Digital Assets in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of February 6, 2023, established a model under which the trading and custody of unsecured digital assets are permitted only on licensed platforms of the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC), under the supervision of the regulator. Outside the AIFC perimeter, exchanges and exchangers are illegal; thus, the AIFC infrastructure serves as the primary legal channel for law enforcement requests and asset freezes.
In 2024, the Financial Monitoring Agency traced and recovered crypto assets from the Eolus pyramid scheme: approximately USD 520,000 was transferred to the agency’s special account for victim compensation, and the court additionally confiscated 408,000 USDT. This demonstrated that under the current model, not only are seizure and confiscation possible, but asset recovery for victims is also effectively ensured.
✍️ Conclusions and Recommendations
If you have lost your crypto assets as a result of unlawful actions, do not waste time. Prompt measures significantly increase the chances of recovering your property. The first steps to take are:
Gather all available data
Record the addresses of the wallets involved, transaction hashes, links to the perpetrators' social media profiles, correspondence with them, details of transfers on exchanges, etc. The more information you collect, the easier it will be for investigators to trace the flow of funds.
Contact the police immediately
File a report requesting the initiation of criminal proceedings for the theft of your crypto assets. Attach all the evidence you have collected-screenshots, blockchain extracts, copies of correspondence. If possible, indicate the applicable articles of the Criminal Code (e.g., fraud, theft, extortion). Even if the legal qualification later changes, the critical point is to officially record the crime.
Reach out to exchanges and services
Conduct or commission blockchain analytics. If your assets may have ended up on a cryptocurrency exchange or other service, contact their support team and request a freeze of the funds that belong to you. Attach a copy of your police report or reference the case number-this increases the likelihood that the exchange will cooperate. Time is critical: the sooner the exchange learns of the theft, the higher the chance of freezing the assets before they are withdrawn.
File a civil claim
In parallel (or after the initiation of criminal proceedings), file a civil lawsuit against those involved in the theft. Demand compensation for damages or the return of unjust enrichment. This creates additional pressure on the wrongdoers. If the criminal case is delayed, you will still have the option of obtaining a civil judgment and seeking its enforcement (e.g., against the defendant’s other property).
- ⚠️ Remember:In crypto-related crimes, the speed of response is crucial. The sooner the investigation begins and blocking measures are applied, the easier it will be to recover the assets themselves.
Our lawyers and crypto-crime investigation experts are ready to provide qualified assistance. We will advise you on all legal matters, help gather the necessary documentation, and establish effective cooperation with law enforcement and exchanges. Do not allow the situation to escalate — act quickly and professionally to recover your crypto assets and restore justice.
Want to learn more and get expert advice? Leave your email and we will contact you promptly!
Check blockchain address using Btrace
In seconds, determine the risk level of the counterparty’s address, find out the source of his funds and make an informed decision about interacting with him.
PREVENT FUNDS BLOCKING
PROTECT YOURSELF FROM SCAMMERS
AVOID TROUBLE WITH THE LAW
We also recommend