BTHMB Holdings Pte Ltd v Kim Byung Gun: Accounting for Cryptocurrency Sale Proceeds
In the case of BTHMB Holdings Pte Ltd v Kim Byung Gun, heard in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore on 2 August 2024, the court addressed whether Dr. Kim provided a proper account of US$22,596,913.76 in cryptocurrency sale proceeds, as previously ordered. The court declared that Dr. Kim failed to provide a proper, complete, and accurate account and ordered Dr. Kim to pay BTHMB costs of S$245,000 and disbursements of S$56,395.37.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
I declare that Dr Kim has not provided a proper, complete, and accurate account.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Dr. Kim was ordered to account for cryptocurrency sale proceeds. The court declared Dr. Kim failed to provide a proper account and awarded indemnity costs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BTHMB Holdings Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Kim Byung Gun | Defendant | Individual | Breached obligation to account | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andre Maniam | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Dr. Kim was ordered to provide an account to BTHMB of what became of the US$22,596,913.76 in proceeds of sale of BXA Coin cryptocurrency.
- Dr. Kim provided Mr. Wong’s expert opinion that US$18,490,836.92 of the sale proceeds was paid to BTHMB as part of the Defence Transactions.
- There remained a shortfall of US$4,106,076.84 that Dr. Kim still had to account for.
- BTHMB sought a declaration that Mr. Kim has breached his obligation to account for the Sale Proceeds, and costs on an indemnity basis with a certificate of costs for three solicitors.
- Dr. Kim resisted the declaration sought by BTHMB and argued that costs should be on a standard basis without a certificate of costs for three solicitors.
- BTHMB contended that Dr Kim breached his obligation to account by failing to provide a proper, complete, and accurate account.
- Dr Kim says that he has accounted for the sum of US$4,106,076.84 to the best of his recollection.
5. Formal Citations
- BTHMB Holdings Pte Ltd v Kim Byung Gun, Suit No 629 of 2019 (Summons No 4105 of 2022), [2024] SGHC 197
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Hearing began | |
| Hearing continued | |
| Hearing continued | |
| Hearing continued | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Obligation to Account
- Outcome: The court declared that Dr. Kim has not provided a proper, complete, and accurate account.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2023] 4 SLR 449
- Costs
- Outcome: The court ordered Dr. Kim to pay BTHMB costs of S$245,000 and disbursements of S$56,395.37 on an indemnity basis, and granted BTHMB a certificate of costs for three solicitors.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that Dr. Kim breached his obligation to account
- Costs on an indemnity basis
- Certificate of costs for three solicitors
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Obligation to Account
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Financial Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BTHMB Holdings Pte Ltd v Kim Byung Gun | General Division of the High Court | Yes | [2023] 4 SLR 449 | Singapore | The judgment ordered Dr. Kim to provide an account to BTHMB of what became of the US$22,596,913.76 in BXA Coin sale proceeds. |
| Baker, Michael A (executor of the estate of Chantal Burnison, deceased) v BCS Business Consulting Services Pte Ltd and others | High Court | Yes | [2023] 1 SLR 35 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an accounting party has the duty of providing a “complete, proper and accurate” account with “sufficient supporting evidence, oral or documentary depending on the nature and quantum of such expenses”. |
| Lalwani Shalini Gobind and another v Lalwani Ashok Bherumal | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 90 | Singapore | Cited for the twin purposes of an account, namely, for BTHMB to know what had become of the Sale Proceeds and to determine whether Dr Kim may have profited from the use of the Sale Proceeds beyond the amount of interest awarded against him. |
| Aero-Gate Pte Ltd v Engen Marine Engineering Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 267 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there is a public interest in upholding the court’s authority as expressed in court orders. |
| Yong Kong Yoong Mark and others v Ting Choon Meng and another | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 4 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that in relation to the accounting process, the services of more than two solicitors are “reasonably necessary”. |
| Lim Oon Kuin and others v Ocean Tankers (Pte) Ltd (interim judicial managers appointed) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 1 SLR 434 | Singapore | Cited for the touchstone of unreasonable conduct in relation to costs on an indemnity basis. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Account
- Sale Proceeds
- BXA Coin
- Indemnity Costs
- Certificate of Costs
- Cryptocurrency
15.2 Keywords
- Accounting
- Cryptocurrency
- Sale Proceeds
- Indemnity Costs
- Singapore
- Civil Procedure
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Costs | 90 |
| Certificate of costs for three solicitors | 85 |
| Indemnity costs | 80 |
| Accounting and Inquiry | 75 |
| Civil Practice | 60 |
| Remedies | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Accounting
- Cryptocurrency
- Civil Procedure