SINGAPORE: The mastermind of a multi-million-dollar Ponzi scheme disguised as cryptocurrency investments was jailed for six years and fined S$ 16, 000 ( US$ 12, 284 ) on Monday ( Aug 26 ).
Yang Bin, a 61-year-old Dutch national, admitted to forming and running a business with allegedly 300,000 equipment that was mine bitcoin and generate enough income to give buyers daily earnings of 0.5 %.
In fact, Yang’s business had no such machines and instead used cash from early investors to pay earlier investors.  ,
Yang admitted guilt to eight counts, including conspiring to steal, working without a true work slip, and hiring a person as an individual without a valid job complete, according to Forbes as the second-richest gentleman in China in 2001.  ,
For his punishment, another 11 claims of a related nature were taken into account.  ,
After arriving in Singapore with a cultural visit go, Yang included A&, A Blockchain Innovation on April 20, 2021. He did not have a genuine work go to operate his company, of which he was president.  ,
He hired co-accused people Lu Huangbin as A&, A’s CEO, Chen Wei as his private helper and a producer, and Wang Xinghong as chief technical officer. All three reported to Yang, who was the only person in charge of the company’s resources.  ,
Yang directed Chen to obtain money from buyers, which he used for his individual bills.  ,
Of the co-accused, simply Wang has been dealt with. He was jailed for five times on Aug 6 , for his part in the program. Lu and Chen’s scenarios are pending.  ,
INVESTORS PROMISED FIXED DAILY RETURN OF 0.5 %
Between May 20, 2021 and Feb 15, 2022, A&, A offered its Chain Mining Scheme to local investors, promising them a set routine return of 0.5 per share on their investment, which had come from mine bitcoin.
In advertising materials to traders, A&, A claimed it had agreed with Yunnan Shun Ai Yun Xun Investment Holdings to get 70 per cent equity of 300, 000 mining equipment in Yunnan, China.
By producing such marketing materials as presentation slides and videos, Yang sought to” create a vein of legitimacy,” according to Deputy Public Prosecutor Wong Shiau Yin, who sought to “inspire investors to part with their monies.”
Lu was given the task of marketing by Yang to reach out to investors.  ,
The mining machines could purportedly mine cryptocurrency, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, and could generate revenue for returns in such a manner.
In reality, there was no such agreement, with A&, A instead operating a money circulation scheme where it used money from later investors to pay returns to earlier investors.  ,
Wang created an application at Yang’s suggestion that investors could use to allegedly purchase tokens to buy in the mining scheme and monitor their daily returns.  ,
The app was the “entire ecosystem and foundation” on which the scheme operated, added Ms Wong.  ,
APP SHOWED FAKE RETURNS
In fact, the app was centralized software where system administrators could enter random returns.  ,
Between May 2021 and February 2022, the scheme attracted more than 700 investors who invested in the amount of S$ 6.7 million.
Yang’s charges involve about S$ 1.8 million across 12 victims, who lost around S$ 1.1 million after accounting for returns that some had obtained through the scheme.  , Yang did not make any restitution.  ,
Yang admitted that the sum belonged to investors who had invested in A& and A, and that a total of S$ 100, 000 was taken from his residence.  ,
Ms Wong sought six-and-a-half years to seven-and-a-half years ‘ jail and a S$ 16, 000 fine for Yang, describing him as the mastermind who was at the” top of the hierarchy” within the scheme.  ,
She cited Yang’s premeditation and the sophistication of the scheme as being the result of the created app and marketing materials.  ,
Yang’s lawyer, Teo Choo Kee, argued for five years ‘ jail or slightly more for Yang, hinging on the sentence that was handed to co-accused Wang.  ,
Mr. Teo claimed that Yang was only slightly more guilty than Wang, who also had a significant part in the scheme’s perpetuation, and not that his jail term should be one and a half years more than his co-accused.
Yang had pleaded guilty early and worked closely with the authorities, the lawyer said as a reassuring gimmick.  ,
Mr. Teo claimed that Wang, who had gotten about S$ 100, 000, had received less money from the scheme.
However Ms Wong pointed out that the authorities had recovered S$ 100, 000 from Yang’s residence, all of which had been obtained through his bogus scheme.  ,
Addressing the court via a Mandarin interpreter, Yang said he had stomach cancer.  ,
District Judge Brenda Chua noted that Yang had a higher level of culpability than Wang and had been the mastermind of the scheme and overall manager of the business.  ,
Commenting on the charges, the judge said that not only were” significant amounts” involved, but that no restitution had been made to victims.  ,
For conspiring to cheat, Yang could have been jailed up to 10 years, and fined. As his charge was amalgamated, he could have received twice the amount of punishment.  ,
For working without a valid work pass, he could have been jailed up to two years, or fined up to S$ 20, 000, or both.  ,
For hiring a foreign employee without a valid work pass, he could have been jailed up to a year, or fined between S$ 5, 000 and S$ 30, 000, or both.  ,