Odaily reported that the China Prosecutors WeChat account published an article titled “Foreign-Related Case Study | Key Points for Obtaining Cross-Border Electronic Evidence in Virtual Currency Money Laundering Crimes.” The article focuses on how electronic evidence should be collected in cases involving money laundering through virtual currency, especially when the evidence and related entities cross borders.
Wallet addresses as the investigative entry point
The article states that, when handling virtual currency money laundering cases, investigators should take virtual currency wallet addresses as the breakthrough point. By applying blockchain technology to analyze on-chain data characteristics and the paths through which funds move, investigators can identify money laundering activity carried out with the help of virtual currency and pursue more precise enforcement.
According to the article, wallet addresses provide a practical starting point for tracing suspected criminal activity. Investigators can analyze the relationships between different on-chain addresses, review how assets move between those addresses, and organize the transaction paths and fund flows reflected in blockchain data. This process helps connect virtual currency transaction activity with alleged money laundering conduct and provides an electronic evidence basis for case handling.
Two core proof elements: identity and transactions
The article proposes that evidence collection should be built around two core elements of proof: identity relevance and transaction relevance. Identity relevance is used to establish the connection among on-chain addresses, platform accounts, and specific natural persons. Transaction relevance is used to show the relationship between transaction records, fund flows, and the conduct under investigation. Together, these two elements support the construction of an evidentiary chain linking “address — account — natural person.”
Domestic evidence as the basis, cross-border evidence as reinforcement
For the acquisition of cross-border electronic evidence, the article recommends an evidence collection model in which domestic evidence collection serves as the foundation and cross-border evidence collection provides reinforcement. Under this approach, materials that can be obtained domestically should first be fixed and preserved, while cross-border channels can be used to supplement the evidentiary record when needed. The article also says the applicable boundaries between unilateral evidence collection and bilateral judicial assistance should be regulated in order to improve the efficiency of cross-border evidence gathering.
For third-party entities such as exchanges, wallet service providers, and payment channels, the article recommends establishing an “element-based” standard for evidence requests. The key data to be obtained includes KYC materials and change records, login logs, device and IP information, two-factor authentication records, deposit and withdrawal records, on-chain addresses, transaction hashes, and risk control and freezing records. By comparing and combining these categories of data, case handlers can further establish the relationship between wallet addresses, platform accounts, and natural persons, supporting evidence review and fact determination in virtual currency money laundering cases.