PANews reported on December 28 that according to the official account of the People's Court of Lingling District, Yongzhou City, the People's Court of Lingling District, Yongzhou City recently concluded a dispute over unjust enrichment caused by the failure to repay virtual currency. In January 2020, Yang transferred 78,000 yuan to Xie via WeChat, hoping that Xie would help him buy a certain virtual currency on a certain platform for investment, and entrusted Xie to hold it on his behalf. So, Xie was entrusted by Yang to buy virtual currency and hold it on his behalf. After a period of time, Yang asked to withdraw from the investment, and Xie transferred 3,000 virtual currencies to Yang's "wallet address" on the platform, saying that he would settle the account later. In April 2021, Yang sued Xie to the court. After mediation by the court, the two reached a consensus on the mediation agreement, and Xie was willing to return 78,000 yuan to Yang in one lump sum. After Xie returned 57,000 yuan to Yang, he was unwilling to return the remaining debt, saying that the 3,000 virtual currencies transferred to Yang before were worth more than 20,000 yuan and should be deducted from the debt. Yang did not agree with the above repayment method. As the debt repayment failed, Xie asked Yang to transfer the virtual currency back. However, the virtual currency platform had been closed. Xie then sued Yang in court, demanding that Yang return 3,000 virtual currencies worth more than 20,000 yuan.
After trial, the Lingling District People's Court held that the Civil Code aims to protect the legitimate rights and interests of civil subjects and maintain social and economic order. A certain virtual currency does not have the same legal status as legal tender, is not legal compensation, and should not and cannot be circulated and used as currency in the market. Xie asked Yang to return the cash value of 3,000 virtual currencies, which actually claimed the exchange between virtual currency and legal tender. The claim was not legal, and the two parties did not reach an agreement on the compensation amount of a certain virtual currency. The final judgment dismissed Xie's lawsuit. After Xie appealed the judgment, the second-instance court upheld the original judgment.
