Under the applicable sentencing guidelines, Mashens can basically face up to 30 years in prison. However, federal judges must consider various other factors when ruling a judgment, including the characteristics of the defendant and personal history, the possibility that they may re-offend, and so on.

“Patching the facts together is a complicated piece of paper to sentence a fair judgment,” said Timothy Howard, a partner at Freshfields law firm and former South District attorney in New York.

Before the sentencing hearing, Masinski's legal representative asked the judge to sentence 366 days in prison, citing his guilt, Israel's military service, his childhood deprivation and external market factors that caused the Celsius crush.

"This case is not about an arrogant, greedy liar who thinks he can get rid of stealing people's hard-earned money to satisfy his hedonistic pleasure," Mashsky's lawyer said in court documents. "That's afterwardsa shallow and dehumanized metaphor that does not apply here. ”

At the same time, the Ministry of Justice asked the judge to sentence 20 years in prison. Prosecutors claimed that despite admitting guilt and admitting certain lies, Masinsky showed no concept of his wrongdoing. They believed that he had not unknowingly deceived his customers.

"His crime is not the product of negligence, savage or doom. It is the result of intentional, calculated decisions to lie, deceive and steal." "He gave up all the pretendings of admitting his ongoing wrongdoing...this deep remorse deficit underlines the ongoing danger he posed."

The yawn gap between the defense demands and prosecutions reflects the dispute between the parties over the nature of Mashinsky’s wrongdoing: that is, whether the founder of Celsius committed a few unwelcome lies, which he has admitted, or a common and extensive fraud.

“In the scope of factual disputes, they are usually relatively small, and the core of the behavior is obvious,” said Katherine Reilly, a partner at the law firm Pryor Cashman. “But here, the defense does try to ensure that the crime is narrower than the government claims.”

Howard said Mashinsky and his attorneys were "walking on the ropes" when demanding a year-long prison sentence and admitting wrongdoing. "This is a strategic decision that defense attorneys must make. You need to balance advocacy with the lowest sentences while also maintaining credibility with the judge."

The government made a direct comparison in its submission, with Mashinsky versus a variety of other convicted fraudsters, including Sam Bankman Fried. In the filing, Masinski's attorney attempted to establish as distance as possible between the client and Bankman Frying. They asserted: “While there may be some superficial similarities, the two crypto lawsuits and their respective defendants are different.” The defense lawyers argued that the crucial difference is that Mashsky has not been accused of embezzlement or stealing client funds.

"This difference is trapped in the factual dispute raised in the submission," Riley said. "Is this meant to correct two mistakes in the ship's trial? Or is it really a fraud platform full of self-communication?"

Ultimately, the judge proved no sympathy for Masinsky's version of the incident, ruling that the severity of his crime and the extent of damage he caused to the victim deserves serious imprisonment.

After receiving his verdict, Mashinsky will be temporarily released, while the prison department chooses the right facilities. Legal experts say that, typically, white-collar defendants like Mashinsky are placed with other nonviolent offenders.

In the federal system, there is no possibility of parole. Once the clock starts ticking during Mashinsky's jail time, the best he hopes is to release early on good reason for behavior, but is usually released only after 85% of the sentence is sentenced.

Howard said that when it comes to verdicts against a large number of verdicts, Mashinsky divided them by "risky strategy." "It did make a hole in the boat."