AAVE：Arbitrum Bro, Can the 71 million dollars frozen by you on the hacker's end be returned first? The user is waiting for asset recovery. Arbitrarum: Don't worry, DAO is currently voting and the process should be completed soon. DeFi United, I understand, Bro。 AAVE: Waiting for your good news! (American lawyer appears) Lawyer for DPRK creditors: Brothers, I know you are in a hurry, but don't rush yet. This money cannot be moved at the moment. AAVE：？？？ Lawyer for DPRK creditors: We have previous judgments against DPRK on hand. This hacker is Lazarus, and Lazarus is the DPRK, so this money belongs to the property interests of the DPRK. Since it belongs to the DPRK, we can proceed with the claim (priority should be given to us). AAVE: Wait a moment. How do you prove that this is a North Korean hacker? Lawyer for DPRK creditors: That's what everyone says on Twitter. AAVE:... And what else? Lawyer for DPRK creditors: There are also news reports. AAVE: Even if it's really Lazarus, does the money stolen by hackers become his property after just a few days in his hands? Lawyer for DPRK creditors: At least enough for us to advocate for enforcement. AAVE: Let me give you another example. Someone smashed the Tiffany window and stole a diamond, but the security guard in the store intercepted the diamond. Since the thief used to owe money to someone else, now the thief's creditor comes running and says, 'Does this diamond belong to me now?'? Lawyer for DPRK creditors: If it can be proven that the thief had a financial interest in it, yes. AAVE: But that's a stolen diamond. Lawyer for DPRK creditors: Bro, tell me it's useless, go to court and reason. Arbitrarum: Can I transfer the money to the asset recovery wallet now? Lawyer for DPRK creditors: Cannot. The restriction notice has been delivered. Don't move without a court order. AAVE: But this money corresponds to the loss of innocent users. Lawyer for DPRK creditors: Bro, tell me it's useless, go to court and reason. AAVE: If this logic holds true, will intercepting hacker funds in the future require a lawsuit against the hacker's creditors first? Lawyer for North Korean creditors: Welcome to experience the brilliance of the judiciary in Amelia. AAVE: Who dares to freeze hacker funds in the first place in the future? After being frozen, they were instead dragged into a costly asset ownership lawsuit. DPRK creditor: Bro, it's useless to tell me, go to court and reason. AAVE: If the money stolen by hackers from sanctioned countries can be used to repay old judgments, it means that every time the funds stolen by hackers are recovered, it may become a "hacker victim vs hacker country creditor" competition. DPRK creditor: So, brothers, don't touch the money. AAVE: Your Honor, either lift this restriction as soon as possible or ask the other party to provide a 300 million yuan deposit! Users are waiting for asset recovery now, not a year from now! Judge: Brothers, I know you're in a hurry, but don't rush yet. We have to follow the rules .. (Rewritten from @ the_stmart_ape post)