TL;DR:
- A South Korean trader reported the block of approximately 1,000,000 USDT after registering profits in futures operations.
- LBank publicly stated that it does not restrict accounts for generating profits and claimed the user is undergoing a review process.
- On-chain researcher ZachXBT intervened in the public debate following the broadcast of responses and promotions linked to the platform.
LBank denies accusations of arbitrarily freezing funds. The centralized cryptocurrency exchange stepped forward following a complaint by a trader claiming the retention of a balance close to $1 million and the liquidation of their open positions.
Let’s clear this up 👇
We don’t restrict accounts just because someone makes a profit.
Trading and withdrawals are running normally. We’re working directly with the user on this account review and will share what we can while protecting their privacy.
If something isn’t right,…
— LBank.com (@LBank_Exchange) November 10, 2026
The complaint became public on Tuesday, November 10, when the operator, identified on social media under the username @solyfw34, published their formal grievance directed at the exchange’s management team and various sector observers. The trader explained that withdrawal restrictions began on September 19. Ten days later, on September 29, the platform disabled their futures contract trading functions, preventing manual risk management before the market liquidated their positions.
The balance claimed by the user consists of approximately 1,000,000 USDT retained in their spot wallet. According to the trader’s testimony, the account experienced a significant equity increase derived from favorable transactions in the derivatives market. The affected party maintained that they completed the identity verification (KYC) procedures required by technical support without receiving a formal resolution over several weeks.
LBank’s institutional response came through a post on its X account. The platform assured that deposit, trading, and withdrawal operations function normally for the general user base. In its statement, the firm specified that generating profits does not constitute a reason for suspension and described the case as an individual account review subject to privacy and compliance protocols.
The exchange announced the hiring of external legal counsel to address the claim. According to market data, the company maintains that the preventive measures respond to internal risk management and operational control parameters.
ZachXBT’s Intervention and Community Señalments
All of this controversy triggered ZachXBT‘s investigative intuition. The analyst intervened in public conversations after various profiles and promoters associated with the platform shared messages of institutional backing against the trader’s accusations.
At least make it less obvious having your KOLs quote the post with the same script.
LBank is just another offshore bucket shop CEX no serious trader should ever touch. pic.twitter.com/Qcfhns61tL
— ZachXBT (@zachxbt) November 10, 2026
The affected operator maintained that they exhausted private instances before resorting to open denunciation. In their statements, they claimed to have sent a legal notice to LBank’s corporate representatives granting a seven-business-day deadline to obtain a response. Upon receiving no detailed reply, they chose to publish screenshots of their operating history, deposit records, and balances to support the legitimacy of their funds.
The merchant also indicated that they will escalate the case background before the Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA) and South Korean platforms such as Bithumb. Financial legislation in South Korea maintains strict frameworks for supervising virtual asset service providers and protecting local investors.
Unregulated centralized exchanges or those based in offshore jurisdictions face constant requests for greater technical transparency regarding their forced liquidation mechanisms. According to the claim record, the lack of access to the closing interface during periods of high volatility constitutes the core of the financial loss alleged by the user.
LBank keeps the account under internal investigation. The final resolution of the dispute will depend on the technical ruling determining whether the transactions violated the terms of service or if the retained assets will be released upon conclusion of the audit announced by the firm.
