Lawyers for victims of North Korean terrorism have escalated their legal fight to seize about $71 million in frozen cryptocurrency linked to the April 18 rsETH exploit on Aave. In a new court filing Tuesday, they argued the incident was not a simple theft but a fraudulent lending transaction. This directly challenges Aave’s attempt to block a restraining notice that prevents the assets from being released.
The 30-page opposition brief, filed in the Southern District of New York, argues that under longstanding U.S. law, a fraudster can obtain legal title to property acquired through deception. The lawyer representing the victims wrote that “the law is crystal clear that a fraud victim passes title, not merely possession, to a fraudster.” They compared the situation to Charles Ponzi obtaining defeasible title to his victims’ cash.
The background of the exploit
The dispute stems from a cross-chain bridge exploit last month that drained around $230 million from Aave, one of the largest decentralized lending protocols. Forensics firms like Chainalysis and TRM Labs widely attribute the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. The attacker minted unbacked rsETH tokens, used them as collateral on Aave’s lending markets, and borrowed real ether against those worthless deposits.
Developers tied to the Arbitrum blockchain later intercepted about $71 million before it could be cashed out. That frozen amount is now at the center of the legal battle.
New legal argument under federal law
The filing also escalates the dispute beyond New York property law by invoking the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA). This post-9/11 federal law allows people who win court judgments against state sponsors of terrorism to collect from any U.S.-held property belonging to that country. If the court accepts this theory, Aave’s earlier arguments about New York property law may become less relevant.
The filing also questions whether Aave has legal standing to challenge the freeze at all. It points to the company’s own terms of service, which state that Aave does not have “possession, custody or control” over user assets. This is a core feature of decentralized finance.
Potential relief for affected users
Interestingly, the lawyers noted that the affected users may not actually need the frozen ether. DeFi United, an industry-led recovery fund that Aave itself is part of, has raised $327.95 million as of Tuesday morning. That is more than four times the disputed $71 million.
A hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, May 6, in a Manhattan federal court. The outcome could set an important precedent for how frozen crypto assets are handled in cases involving state-sponsored terrorism.
