Bithumb Prevails in Two Lawsuits Over Mistaken Bitcoin Credits

South Korean crypto exchange Bithumb has reportedly secured its first-instance court wins in two lawsuits seeking to recover proceeds from users who sold Bitcoin that the exchange mistakenly credited to their accounts. The rulings come as regulators continue to scrutinize the earlier operational lapse and Bithumb works to contain the financial impact.

According to a report by Chosun Biz, the Seoul Central District Court ruled in Bithumb’s favor in two of four unjust enrichment cases filed against users. The lawsuits involved different amounts: one ruling concerned a claim of 194 million won (about $140,000), while the other related to 5 million won (about $3,600). Two additional cases—seeking roughly 14.8 million won (about $10,700) and 500 million won (about $362,000)—remain pending, the report said.

Key takeaways

• Bithumb has won first-instance rulings in two of four unjust enrichment lawsuits tied to a February Bitcoin crediting error.
• The court decisions cover claims of 194 million won and 5 million won, while two other claims are still awaiting outcomes.
• The lawsuits proceeded via service by public notice because standard delivery methods for court documents failed for the defendants.
• The legal push targets proceeds from users who sold Bitcoin credited by mistake before affected accounts were frozen.

How the court cases connect to Bithumb’s February mistake

The underlying dispute traces back to an event on Feb. 6, 2026, during which Bithumb intended to distribute rewards denominated in Korean won. As described in earlier coverage by Cointelegraph, Bithumb said the error happened during a promotional activity: an employee allegedly selected Bitcoin as the payment unit instead of the intended fiat currency.

Rather than crediting the planned reward amount in won to 249 users, the exchange reportedly credited customer accounts with 620,000 BTC. At the time of the incident, that volume was valued at more than $40 billion, according to the reporting that followed the episode. Bithumb later stated that it recovered the vast majority of the mistakenly credited amount—618,212 BTC—leaving only a small residual shortfall.

However, the problem was not purely theoretical. Some users had reportedly already sold 1,788 BTC worth of the credited balances before Bithumb moved to freeze the affected accounts. It is those early sales that became the focus of Bithumb’s March litigation strategy.

What Bithumb is trying to recover through unjust enrichment suits

As reported by Cointelegraph, Bithumb filed four unjust enrichment lawsuits in March against users who sold the mistakenly credited Bitcoin and did not return the proceeds. The exchange’s approach, as characterized in that earlier reporting, was to seek monetary recovery from the sale proceeds rather than compel users to return Bitcoin itself.

The newly reported first-instance rulings therefore represent more than symbolic legal progress: they support Bithumb’s argument that users who benefited from the mistaken credits should compensate the exchange to the extent of the sold proceeds. Still, with half of the cases remaining pending, the broader extent of Bithumb’s ultimate recovery is not yet fully determined.

For users, the developments also underscore a practical risk in operational error scenarios. Even when a credit is unintended, actions taken immediately after the balance appears—such as trading or exchanging the credited asset—can later become a subject of legal dispute if the credit is subsequently reversed or invalidated.

Service by public notice highlights delivery hurdles in the lawsuits

Chosun Biz also noted that both of the cases that reached rulings advanced through service by public notice. The court reportedly used this method because it could not deliver the necessary documents to the defendants through ordinary channels.

That procedural detail matters because it can affect how quickly cases move and how defendants participate. While service by public notice is not unusual in certain jurisdictions when direct service fails, it can raise questions about whether defendants were fully informed in time to respond through standard procedures. The reported decisions, however, indicate the court proceeded to judgment nonetheless.

Regulatory pressure continues alongside the litigation

While the lawsuits play out in civil court, Bithumb is also facing ongoing regulatory scrutiny related to the February error. South Korea’s Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) reportedly investigated the incident, focusing on how the exchange could credit customers with Bitcoin it did not hold.

Cointelegraph previously reported that the regulator sent Bithumb an inspection opinion in early August, which marked the formal start of sanctions proceedings, though no final penalty had been announced at the time of that reporting. In the same earlier coverage, Cointelegraph said it reached out to the Financial Services Commission (FSC) for an update but did not receive a response by publication.

Separately, Bithumb has faced other legal and compliance challenges this year. South Korean police reportedly raided its offices in June as part of an investigation unrelated to the Bitcoin crediting error, involving allegations of favoritism related to lawmaker Kim Byung-ki. The company is also contesting a separate six-month partial business suspension over alleged Anti-Money Laundering violations; Cointelegraph reported that a Seoul court stayed the suspension in April pending the outcome of Bithumb’s challenge.

Taken together, the court rulings and the regulator’s continuing work indicate that Bithumb’s February incident is being treated as both a financial and governance issue—not merely a one-off operational glitch. For investors and market participants, the key question is whether Bithumb’s internal controls reforms and compliance measures will satisfy regulators after a mispayment of this magnitude.

What to watch next

With two remaining unjust enrichment lawsuits still pending, the next development will likely be whether Bithumb’s legal strategy yields further first-instance judgments and how those cases ultimately resolve. At the same time, market observers will continue to watch for any FSS sanctions outcome, since regulatory findings could shape how exchanges in South Korea tighten operational controls to prevent similar crediting errors.