一次收受市值数千万元以太币，证监会科技监管司原司长姚前案详情披露

Core Viewpoint - The case of Yao Qian, former director of the Technology Supervision Department of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), reveals significant corruption involving the acceptance of bribes in the form of virtual currencies, highlighting the challenges of regulating new forms of corruption in the digital age [2][8]. Group 1: Case Background - Yao Qian was investigated for serious violations of discipline and law in April 2024 and was expelled from the party and public office in November 2024 [2]. - He misused his regulatory powers to benefit specific technology service providers and engaged in corrupt practices, including accepting bribes in virtual currencies [2][3]. Group 2: Corruption Methods - The investigation uncovered that Yao Qian utilized hardware wallets to store virtual currencies, which were used as a means to conceal corrupt transactions [3][4]. - Virtual currencies, due to their anonymity and the ability to operate outside traditional banking systems, posed significant challenges for regulatory oversight [4][6]. Group 3: Evidence and Investigation - The investigative team discovered a hardware wallet in Yao Qian's office, which contained virtual currencies valued at several tens of millions of RMB [3][5]. - A significant amount of money, including a transaction of 10 million RMB traced back to a virtual currency trading account, was found to be linked to Yao Qian's illicit activities [6][8]. Group 4: Key Individuals - A close associate, Jiang Guoqing, played a crucial role in facilitating Yao Qian's corrupt transactions, including the transfer of virtual currencies [7][8]. - The investigation revealed that Jiang Guoqing was involved in nearly all major transactions and acted as an intermediary for bribes [7]. Group 5: Implications for Regulation - The case underscores the need for enhanced regulatory frameworks to address the complexities of virtual currencies in corruption cases [9]. - The successful investigation of Yao Qian's case serves as a precedent for tackling similar corruption issues involving virtual currencies in the future [9].