Thailand's Supreme Court has ruled that Bitcoin qualifies as property under the country's criminal law, rejecting a defense argument that the cryptocurrency could not be stolen because it exists only as electronic data and does not constitute legal tender.

The decision upheld a 10-year prison sentence in a case that originated on the island of Koh Samui in September 2022. According to the judgment, the victim was threatened and assaulted before being forced to transfer 2.480801 BTC — worth approximately $50,000 at the time — to a wallet controlled by the attacker. The defense had contended that, because Bitcoin exists as electronic data and is not legal tender, it could not be the object of theft under criminal law. The argument turned on a question that reaches courtrooms as digital assets enter mainstream use: whether theft statutes can apply to assets held purely as electronic records rather than as physical objects or official currency.

In its ruling, the court found that converting money into cryptocurrency does not strip it of its economic value or its legal protection. The court's plenary bench determined that Bitcoin has a market price, can be exchanged for cash when a buyer is available, and can be owned by members of the public, making it eligible for protection under property-related criminal statutes.

"The value of the money transferred as property therefore fulfills the elements of an offense against property," the court said in a translated summary.

In reaching its conclusion, the judges cited Thailand's 2018 digital asset business decree, which defines cryptocurrency as electronic data created on a network for use as a medium of exchange. That decree forms the basis of the country's framework for digital asset businesses, and the judgment now extends its definitions from business regulation into criminal proceedings. The court also considered a Bank of Thailand letter stating that cryptocurrency is not legal tender, but concluded that this status did not prevent Bitcoin from being treated as property for the purposes of the criminal case.

As part of the judgment, the court ordered the return of the stolen Bitcoin or, alternatively, compensation of 1.878 million Baht — pairing the criminal sentence with a concrete restitution mechanism for the victim.

The ruling does not confer legal tender status on Bitcoin, nor does it require businesses to accept cryptocurrency as payment. Instead, it draws a distinction between cryptocurrency as a legally protectable asset and money recognized for the settlement of debts. For holders, that separation means protection against theft does not hinge on crypto functioning as official currency; for prosecutors, it clarifies the legal category needed to bring property offenses involving digital assets.

The decision could strengthen the legal basis for prosecuting crypto theft and pursuing restitution in Thailand, where criminals have increasingly targeted holders of digital assets. What remains to be seen is how the property classification is applied in future cases, and how the restitution order here is carried out — whether through the return of the Bitcoin itself or the 1.878 million Baht payment.

Source: BitcoinKE