There was mixed news from the court on one of the largest cryptocurrency transactions in South Korea – it was revealed that Bithumb was largely obliged to publish information that resulted in the client losing just over $27,200 in 2017. However, the exchange phase was justified for two reasons. Individual and much larger cases.
Per Fn News, an authorized body in the Seoul Central District Court, denied the complainant’s claim, named after Hong, for more than US$126,600, as did another case for a person requesting information named Seo, worth US$38,000. In any event, the third complainant, Yang, half-satisfied his legal offer.
All three stated that they were focused on phishing attacks by hooligans who used personal data discovered during a Bithumb hack in 2017.
The attackers had the opportunity to access an information database containing client data, including e-mail addresses, phone numbers, crypto-exchange information, and that’s just the beginning.
The court ruled that Bithumb was guilty of negligence and could do more to prevent the break-in.
The court heard that the programmer called Jung’s cell phone and introduced himself as a representative of the Bithumb client center, confirming Jung’s full name, phone number and, in any case, providing accurate information about the type and number of cryptoassets that Jung had.
The programmer continued to explain that they had had a questionable attempt to log in from abroad, requesting a control code that was sent to Young’s mobile phone to help access abroad.
The court heard that Young provided the confirmation code that the programmer used to transfer his possessions to the Fiat and Ethereum (ETH). At this point, the programmer bought the whole of Bitcoin (BTC) and returned it to an unknown purse.
In any case, the designated authority stated that Young was in any case primarily responsible for the accident because the investigator did not realize that it had been hacked and provided information over the phone. Despite this, the judge stated that the information was accurately captured from the 2017 Internet penetration, and demanded that Bithumb pay Jung over $5,000 for the damage.
In two other cases, the designated authority determined that information, including e-mail addresses and mobile phone numbers, could have been spilled or obtained from different sources, considering that there was no evidence of Bithumb’s risk.