Court Denies Appeal in Landmark BXA Coin Lawsuit
A significant legal battle concerning the failed listing of BXA coin has concluded with the appellate court siding against the plaintiff. The Seoul High Court recently upheld a previous ruling, dismissing a damages claim totaling approximately 12 billion Korean won. The case centers on a 2018 transaction involving the acquisition of BXA coin and its intended listing on the Bithumb platform.
Background of the Dispute
The lawsuit was initiated by Kim Byung-gun, chairman of BK Medical Group, who sought to recover funds related to his agreement to acquire Bithumb’s operating rights. Kim’s camp argued that they entered into a contract based on the premise that BXA coin would be listed on Bithumb. This listing, they contended, was essential for them to secure funds to complete the acquisition, as they had already paid a deposit of around 100 million dollars.
However, the BXA coin never successfully listed on Bithumb. Consequently, Kim’s group was unable to secure the remaining funds, and the acquisition of Bithumb’s operating rights ultimately fell through. Following this, Kim filed a lawsuit in September 2020, seeking the return of a portion of the deposit, approximately 12 billion Korean won, arguing that the listing was promised but not delivered, rendering the contract invalid or subject to cancellation.
Court’s Reasoning
In its initial ruling, the court rejected Kim’s claim. The judges found no explicit clause in the contract obligating the former executive to ensure the listing of BXA coin. While the agreement contained phrases like ‘do our best’ and ‘cooperate as much as possible,’ these were deemed insufficient to establish a firm commitment to list the coin. Furthermore, the court noted the absence of a specific provision stipulating the contract’s termination should BXA fail to list.
The appellate court concurred with this assessment. The panel stated, “It cannot be seen that the defendant guaranteed the listing of BXA to the plaintiff at the time of the contract’s conclusion.” Kim’s side had also argued that the former executive lacked the intention or capability to list BXA from the outset. However, the court did not accept this argument, suggesting that it was unlikely the executive made no effort towards the listing. The court also acknowledged that external factors, such as domestic virtual asset regulations, may have influenced the inability to list the coin.
Previous Criminal Proceedings
The former executive involved in this civil case had previously faced criminal charges related to the same BXA coin listing issue, accused of fraud for allegedly inducing the deposit with false promises of listing. However, in March of last year, the Supreme Court acquitted him. The highest court determined there was insufficient evidence to prove the executive had guaranteed the BXA listing and found it difficult to recognize fraudulent intent. The Supreme Court found no issues with the lower court’s decision to dismiss the case.
Current Status
With the appellate court’s decision, the ruling in favor of the former executive stands unless Kim’s side opts to file a further appeal by June 3rd. If no further action is taken, the appellate court’s decision will become final. The court also ordered Kim’s side to bear the costs of the appeal.
