How the Pin-Up Case Could Undermine Ukraine’s Anti-Russia Sanctions

While President Volodymyr Zelensky urges allies on the international stage to synchronize sanctions against Russia, court proceedings in Ukraine risk undermining the very idea of sanctions targeting Russian companies.

The case centers on the Russian online casino Pin-Up — an investigation that lasted two years and became a symbol of the fight against illegal gambling operations linked to the Russian Federation. When it seemed that Pin-Up had been decisively defeated — senior executives behind bars, officials who aided the company detained, and all assets seized — the picture suddenly shifted. Top executives were released on bail, the company regained nearly all of its property through the courts, and is now challenging the presidential sanctions themselves.

What You Need to Know About the Pin-Up Case

Pin-Up is a Russian online gambling platform, which Ukrainian investigators say is effectively owned by Russian national Dmitry Punin. In Ukraine, it operated through a front company — Ukr Game Technology LLC.

The State Bureau of Investigation (DBR) led the probe for almost two years. Key charges included:
• Establishing an organized criminal group
• Financing the Russian Federation
• Bribery of judges and public officials
• Transferring personal data of Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel to the enemy
• Organizing an attempted assassination of a Ukrainian journalist — a crime prosecutors link directly to Punin and his Ukrainian executives.

In May 2025, under a presidential decree by Zelensky, Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) imposed sanctions against the company and its affiliates. Authorities seized 2.6 billion hryvnias (about $65 million) in cash, along with numerous assets, which were handed over to the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) for transfer to the state budget.

A Courtroom Twist

When it appeared that the Pin-Up saga had reached its end — executives awaiting trial in detention, complicit officials facing charges, and assets under state control — a surprising development emerged.

On July 18, 2025, the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv, a court notorious for high-profile and controversial rulings, approved a plea deal under which one of the senior executives was freed, and the company regained all its seized property except for the cash.

Law enforcement framed this as a major success, emphasizing that the state had secured 2.6 billion hryvnias. Yet the core accusations went far beyond financial losses — they involved direct collaboration with Russia, high-level bribery, and a violent attack on the press. In this light, the court’s decision effectively reduced the consequences for those involved to something resembling a large fine.

Even that fine is now under threat. Ukr Game Technology has filed a lawsuit with Ukraine’s Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the presidential sanctions decree. The hearing is set for October 16, 2025. If the company wins, the state will have to return the seized 2.6 billion hryvnias.

The Rhetoric–Reality Gap

These court battles are playing out against the backdrop of Zelensky’s high-profile appeals to global partners to tighten and coordinate sanctions on Russia. On international platforms, Kyiv insists that such measures must be inevitable and strictly enforced.

Yet domestically, parallel proceedings risk undoing one of the most prominent anti-Russia investigations in recent years — and casting doubt on the effectiveness of Ukraine’s sanctions regime. If Western partners see that, in Ukraine, Russian companies accused of severe criminal offenses can overturn sanctions and reclaim assets through the courts, a legitimate question arises: why impose similar measures elsewhere if the country at war allows them to escape accountability?

As the president focuses on the war and diplomacy abroad, developments at home threaten to undermine one of the key instruments of pressure on the aggressor state. The outcome of the Pin-Up case will test how closely Ukraine’s declarations about countering Russian influence align with the reality of enforcement.