BitcoinWorld Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order Aave and victims of the Kelp DAO hack have submitted an ArbitrumBitcoinWorld Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order Aave and victims of the Kelp DAO hack have submitted an Arbitrum

Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order

2026/05/12 15:15
3분 읽기
이 콘텐츠에 대한 의견이나 우려 사항이 있으시면 [email protected]으로 연락주시기 바랍니다

BitcoinWorld

Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order

Aave and victims of the Kelp DAO hack have submitted an Arbitrum governance proposal to transfer 30,765 ETH — worth approximately $71 million — to an Aave LLC address, following a court order from Manhattan Judge Margaret Garnett. The vote is scheduled to begin on May 15, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal and financial dispute over funds frozen after the hack.

Background of the Frozen Funds

The funds in question were frozen after being linked to a hack attributed by blockchain analytics firms to the Lazarus Group, a North Korean hacking organization. Even if the proposal passes and the transfer occurs, the ETH cannot be used, moved, or managed without explicit court permission, ensuring the funds remain under judicial oversight.

Ownership Dispute Intensifies

Aave maintains that the ETH belongs to the hack victims, not the hackers, escalating the situation into a complex ownership dispute between DeFi victims and a group of terror judgment creditors. Attorneys representing families of North Korean terrorism victims argue that if the frozen funds are definitively linked to North Korea, they could be used to satisfy approximately $877 million in unpaid compensation judgments.

Separate Legal Actions

Separately, this same group of creditors has sued the privacy protocol Railgun DAO in a different lawsuit, alleging it permitted the movement of North Korea-linked funds. This broader legal strategy underscores the creditors’ determination to recover funds from any entity connected to North Korean state-sponsored hacking activities.

Why This Matters

This case highlights the growing intersection of decentralized finance (DeFi) and international law, where frozen assets from hacks become subject to competing claims from victims and third-party creditors. The outcome of the Arbitrum vote and subsequent court decisions could set a precedent for how frozen crypto assets are handled in legal disputes involving state-sponsored hacking groups.

Conclusion

The Arbitrum governance vote on May 15 will be a critical test of how DeFi protocols navigate legal obligations while protecting user assets. As the ownership dispute unfolds, the broader implications for the crypto industry — particularly regarding compliance with court orders and the treatment of frozen funds — remain significant.

FAQs

Q1: What is the purpose of the Arbitrum governance vote?
The vote aims to approve the transfer of 30,765 ETH (approximately $71 million) from frozen accounts to an Aave LLC address, complying with a court order while keeping the funds under judicial control.

Q2: Who is claiming the frozen funds?
Attorneys for families of North Korean terrorism victims argue the funds could be used to satisfy $877 million in unpaid judgments, while Aave maintains the ETH belongs to the Kelp DAO hack victims.

Q3: What happens after the transfer?
Even if the transfer is approved, the funds cannot be moved or used without court permission, leaving the final ownership to be determined by ongoing legal proceedings.

This post Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order first appeared on BitcoinWorld.

시장 기회
에이브 로고
에이브 가격(AAVE)
$87.95
$87.95$87.95
-0.17%
USD
에이브 (AAVE) 실시간 가격 차트
면책 조항: 본 사이트에 재게시된 글들은 공개 플랫폼에서 가져온 것으로 정보 제공 목적으로만 제공됩니다. 이는 반드시 MEXC의 견해를 반영하는 것은 아닙니다. 모든 권리는 원저자에게 있습니다. 제3자의 권리를 침해하는 콘텐츠가 있다고 판단될 경우, [email protected]으로 연락하여 삭제 요청을 해주시기 바랍니다. MEXC는 콘텐츠의 정확성, 완전성 또는 시의적절성에 대해 어떠한 보증도 하지 않으며, 제공된 정보에 기반하여 취해진 어떠한 조치에 대해서도 책임을 지지 않습니다. 본 콘텐츠는 금융, 법률 또는 기타 전문적인 조언을 구성하지 않으며, MEXC의 추천이나 보증으로 간주되어서는 안 됩니다.

No Chart Skills? Still Profit

No Chart Skills? Still ProfitNo Chart Skills? Still Profit

Copy top traders in 3s with auto trading!