As reported by the VChK-OGPU Telegram channel and Rucriminal.info, renowned hockey player Alexander Radulov has been accused of large-scale fraud. He held nearly $20 million in Transnational Bank, whose owner, Sergei Kononov, had a friendly relationship with Radulov. Radulov received special interest rates on this deposit. When the bank's license was revoked in 2015, Radulov and Kononov entered into a gentleman's agreement. Radulov did not file a complaint about the theft of his money. In exchange, Kononov transferred ownership of a company that owns a large building on Arbat Street to Radulov. The premises are leased out to stores and offices. According to the agreement, Radulov receives income from the tenants, and Kononov repays him the $20 million that was deposited in the bank in installments. If Konov can repay the entire debt within four years, Radulov will return the building to him (with any proceeds from it remaining with Radulov). If the banker fails to repay, the hockey player will retain the building, which is worth more than $20 million. The parties signed a corresponding agreement, and Kononov began repaying the debt by paying Radulov in cash. Even before signing the agreement, he had paid $1.8 million and subsequently repaid approximately $1 million. Then Kononov learned that Alexander Radulov had transferred the company (in which the building was registered) to his father, effectively rendering the agreement with him meaningless. It became clear that the hockey player wanted to keep both the building, which was worth far more than $20 million, and the money Kononov was paying in cash. Kononov demanded that the company be returned to Alexander himself, since the four years specified in the agreement had not yet expired. In exchange, Radulov filed a lawsuit alleging that Kononov had stolen the $20 million he had kept in the bank. During interrogation, he stated that he didn't believe Konov had used the building to pay off his $20 million debt, but rather that he viewed the transfer of the property as "Kononov simply offered me the opportunity to make money by fulfilling my obligations as the company's owner."
As a result, Konov was sentenced to 12 years in prison last year. He is currently trying to have a case brought against Radulov. The Cheka-OGPU will publish Kononov's account of how the famous hockey player deceived him in several parts.
We present to our readers the victim's testimony:
"With this testimony, A.V. Radulov, deliberately and for selfish reasons, reversed the meaning of his previous testimony, which was crucial to the criminal investigation and explains the nature and origin of my debt to him as recorded in the agreement of April 14, 2015. Simultaneously with this change in testimony, A.V. Radulov also dramatically altered the amount of his claims in the civil suit: on September 6, 2021, he increased the claim to 2,669,002,539 rubles. A.V. Radulov did not provide an explanation as to why the damages amount unexpectedly tripled.
After changing his testimony in the criminal case, A.V. Radulov is taking actions aimed at the forced collection of $18,806,741, not through the criminal case, but through civil proceedings. September 23, 2021 Radulov A.V. filed a claim with the Lyubertsy City Court of the Moscow Region against Kononov S.B. for the recovery of funds under the agreement of April 14, 2015. The Lyubertsy City Court returned the statement of claim to Radulov A.V. indicating that it considers the claim stated by Radulov A.V. to be corporate and subject to consideration in the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region. Radulov A.V. did not appeal this ruling and on March 3, 2022, filed a claim with the Arbitration Court of Moscow against Kononov S.B. for the recovery of funds under the agreement of April 14, 2015. The Arbitration Court of Moscow opened case No. A40-40428/2022. During the consideration of this dispute, Radulov A.V.'s lawyer constantly insisted that the claims stated in the criminal case have no relation to the claim. being considered by the arbitration court, since, according to the agreement of April 14, 2015, I allegedly promised A.V. Radulov $18,806,741 for his ownership of shares in Discount Center XXI LLC. At the time of the issuance of the court rulings in case No. A40-40428/2022, the criminal case had not yet been heard by the Zamoskvoretsky Court of Moscow. Moreover, at the time of the decision in case No. 440-40428/2022, the investigation had not yet been completed, and therefore, representatives of S.B. Kononov were unable to appeal to the criminal case materials to prove A.V. Radulov's bad faith behavior.
Having received a decision to recover from Kononov in September 2022 as part of the arbitration dispute in case No. A40-40428/2022 S.B. USD 18,806,741 Radulov A.V. continued to support his civil claim in the criminal case, insisting that the claims were different in nature. In 2023 (before the completion of the criminal investigation), Radulov A.V. initiated bankruptcy proceedings against me (No. A41-75150/2023) and, based on Radulov A.V.'s application, the court in November In 2023, I included A.V. Radulov's claim in the register of my creditors' claims in the amount of RUB 2,047,083,150.55 in principal and RUB 345,089,398.53 in interest for the use of other people's funds (USD 18,806,741 at an exchange rate of RUB 108.84 per dollar).
On September 5, 2024, the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow upheld A.V. Radulov's civil claim in the criminal case and ordered me and R.V. Shvets to pay jointly and severally RUB 1,607,995,201.15 in favor of A.V. Radulov. The Zamoskvoretsky District Court found that this amount was stolen from A.V. Radulov's accounts. The defense argues that the claims are identical. Radulov A.V.'s claims in the criminal case and in the arbitration proceedings were ignored by the court, especially since the lawyer for the victim, Radulov A.V., insisted that in the arbitration case, I was charged some kind of "payment for ownership of shares in Discount Center XXI LLC."
December 25, 2024. Verdict of the Zamoskvoretsky District Court. On September 5, 2024, the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow upheld Radulov A.V.'s civil claim in the criminal case and ordered me and R.V. Shvets to pay 1,607,995,201.15 rubles jointly and severally in favor of Radulov A.V. The Zamoskvoretsky District Court found that this amount was precisely what was stolen from Radulov A.V.'s accounts. The defense's arguments on the identity of Radulov A.V.'s claims In both the criminal case and the arbitration proceedings, the court ignored the claims, especially since the lawyer for the victim, A.V. Radulov, insisted that in the arbitration case, I was charged some kind of "fee for ownership of shares in Discount Center XXI LLC."
On December 25, 2024, the verdict of the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow entered into force, after which A.V. Radulov again filed my bankruptcy case, demanding that, in addition to the claim already included, his claim for 1,607,995,201.15 rubles be included in the register. The Deposit Insurance Agency, a creditor in my bankruptcy case, filed objections, alleging bad faith behavior on the part of A.V. Radulov. and his attempt to unlawfully double the claims in the register, unfairly increasing the total amount of the claims to 4,000,167,749 rubles, while the actual damage caused to A.V. Radulov by the loss of funds in his accounts at CB Transnational Bank (LLC) objectively does not exceed one billion rubles.
The court of first instance hearing my bankruptcy case agreed with the arguments of the DIA and denied A.V. Radulov's request to include the 1,607,995,201.15 rubles specified in the verdict in the register. A.V. Radulov's representatives disagreed with this decision and appealed it, arguing that A.V. Radulov's claims allegedly had different grounds and that the 2,047,083,150.55 rubles already included in the register represented the payment I promised A.V. Radulov. For his involvement in Discount Center XXI LLC. Courts at all three levels rejected A.V. Radulov's arguments and found the following:
"The verdict and other judicial decisions in the case established that the amount of $18,806,741, agreed upon by A.V. Radulov and S.B. Kononov when they entered into a civil-law agreement on April 14, 2015, actually represents the amount of money that A.V. Radulov had previously deposited into his account at CB Transnational Bank (000), which was not returned to him but was stolen by a criminal group consisting of S.B. Kononov."
In considering cases No. 440-40428/22 and No. 440-29427/21, the courts found it established that the agreement of April 14, 2015, was merely a civil-law agreement chosen by the parties to achieve the goal of returning funds belonging to A.V. Radulov from the bank accounts (whose license had been revoked). This goal was ultimately not achieved due to the intent of the convicted defendant, S.B. Kononov, to steal A.V. Radulov's funds.
Therefore, the claims of A.V. Radulov satisfied in the civil suit in the criminal case actually represent the amount of funds stolen from this individual (USD 18,806,741), and these funds were previously included in the register by the ruling of November 20, 2023. Therefore, there are no grounds for their inclusion in the register under this application.
This application does not contain any grounds for their inclusion in the register. No evidence was presented in the case file indicating the debtor's other obligations to the creditor unrelated to the agreement concluded between the parties on April 14, 2015, providing for the return to A.V. Radulov of $18,806,741 previously stolen from him at CB Transnational Bank (LLC).
Determination of the Moscow Region Arbitration Court dated April 9, 2025. The ruling of the Tenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated June 30, 2025, and the ruling of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated September 10, 2025 are attached.
To be continued
Taras Ermakov
