MyToken data monitoring shows that on 【June 6th, 14:49】 (Beijing Time), 【Bitfinex.DepositAndWithdrawAndGasfee_1】 transferred 【137170415.98 USDT】 to an address starting with 【0xdac1】, with a total value of approximately 【136.37 million】. Real time monitoring of large transfers：https://www.mytokencap.com/large-transfers/

According to Huoxun Finance, on-chain analyst monitoring shows that another 10,117 ETH were liquidated from a $168 million ETH long position, bringing the total liquidation amount since last night to 31,915.13 ETH. Latest liquidation information: Address 0xc3f…931e4 lent out 41,167.63 ETH at a liquidation price of $1472.09; Address 0x34d…c4ac1 lent out 31,537.7 ETH at a liquidation price of $1458.78. A whale's ETH long position was liquidated, resulting in a total liquidation of over 21,700 ETH.

Odaily Planet Daily reports that Huasheng Securities issued a notice to its clients on the morning of June 6th, stating that starting June 15th (Beijing time), it will adjust services for existing investor accounts in mainland China. This includes suspending new openings and adding to positions in all types of securities, including stocks; only selling and closing positions will be supported. Transfers of funds and securities into the accounts will be suspended, while transfers out will remain normal. The notice states that this adjustment will not affect services provided to existing investors overseas, nor will it affect the security of existing assets for all clients. Clients can continue to check their accounts and manage their existing holdings as usual.

In the past hour, total liquidations across the network reached $36.44 million, with $1.85 million from long positions, with $34.59 million from short positions. BTC liquidation $15.17 million, ETH liquidation $12.47 million.

According to Huoxun Finance, Lin, Zeng, and Dai conspired to use cryptocurrency transactions as a pretext to secretly photograph victims' digital wallet private keys during transactions. After the cryptocurrency was credited to their accounts, they secretly logged into the victims' wallets, canceled the transactions, and transferred the cryptocurrency back to their controlled accounts. The three committed this crime three times, causing the victims a total economic loss of 660,000 yuan. The court of first instance held that, because there was no clear judicial interpretation regarding the calculation of cryptocurrency value and sentencing standards, it was inappropriate to directly determine the amount involved as exceptionally large based on the 660,000 yuan purchased by the victims. Therefore, they sentenced the three to prison terms ranging from eight years to five years and six months, along with fines, based on "other serious circumstances." The Hanyang District Procuratorate of Wuhan City, Hubei Province, filed an appeal, which was supported by the Wuhan Municipal Procuratorate. The prosecution pointed out that the court of first instance applied the law incorrectly and sentenced them too leniently. Prosecutor Dai Wentao of the Wuhan Municipal Procuratorate stated that the victims had a clear amount of loss to refer to, yet the value of the cryptocurrency could not be determined, which constituted a logical contradiction and an error in the application of the law. In judicial practice, determining the amount of theft based on the selling price or transaction price is the mainstream approach, while determining the value of virtual currency based on the actual cost paid by the victim has factual, legal, and practical basis. The Wuhan Intermediate People's Court, in its second instance judgment, adopted the prosecution's opinion, overturned relevant parts of the original judgment, and instead determined that the amount of theft was exceptionally large. The principal offender, Lin, was sentenced to ten years and six months imprisonment for theft, while accomplices Zeng and Dai were sentenced to eight years imprisonment each, with fines imposed on both.