A Shiba Inu (SHIB) investor has sued leading cryptocurrency exchange Binance to give him the 6.7 billion SHIB he lost after being hacked. Here are the details…
Shiba Inu investor sued Binance for failing to get their SHIB back
Kriptokoin.com as we reported on the meme An investor of Shiba Inu (SHIB), the created cryptocurrency inspired by s and the leading meme coin Dogecoin (DOGE), has reached the largest cryptocurrency exchange Binance to give him back the 6.7 billion SHIB he lost after being hacked. sued. According to local cryptocurrency news outlet Livecoins, the Brazilian cryptocurrency trader was hacked in December 2021. At that time, the amount of coins he had stored in MetaMask was 27.7 billion SHIB – which now equates to $271,000. Although the trader said he was hacked, he did not explain how the incident happened.
Trader, using Ethereum Blockchain analysis, found that 6.7 billion of their SHIBs have moved to the leading cryptocurrency exchange Binance. The trader quickly contacted the platform’s support team to ensure the funds could be returned and locked up. Binance’s support team apparently agreed to lock the account, but the money was not refunded. This led the trader to sue Binance to get the 6.7 billion SHIB back. In a court filing, the investor claimed that the funds were part of his family’s livelihood and all of his assets.
Binance opposes lawsuit
According to Livecoins reports, Judge Ricardo Hoffman ordered Binance to block the “Binance 14” address, citing the hacked address in January 2022. The court order contains the following statements:
Therefore, it accepts the defendant’s request for injunctive relief to determine that the entire Binance 14 wallet has been blocked and to submit application access logs (date, time, IP, time zone) related to the wallet in question. I do.
Binance appealed the case to stop the court from blocking one of its wallets, arguing that it had no affiliation with MetaMask and that the investor’s tokens were hacked while in the MetaMask wallet. The case will be reconsidered by the judge, who will decide its course in the near future. Analysts reviewing the case consider this to be an “ambiguous circumstance.”
