Amount Involved: $7340.15 (Account $5340.15 + Wallet $2000) I. Platform Provided Zero Evidence, Judgment Without Any Basis The platform deemed the account "completely in violation" and deducted the full amount, but failed to provide any technical evidence, such as the specific terms violated, the order numbers of the violations, delayed quotes, or hedging/arbitrage. According to financial evidence rules, the platform bears the full burden of proof in asserting unjust enrichment. The platform lacked any terms, order evidence, or technical support, directly confiscating the principal and profits, severely violating procedural justice and contractual principles. II. Trading Strategy Compliant, Industry Standard Trend Trading I used an Expert Advisor (EA) to execute a breakout trend strategy throughout: pre-placing breakout orders at key support and resistance levels, holding positions in the direction of the trend after the price action, with standard stop-loss and take-profit orders, and automatic cancellation of unfilled orders. There was no two-way locking, no hedging/arbitrage, and no millisecond-level price manipulation. This strategy has been used by multiple licensed brokers such as XM and TMGM for a long time without being deemed illegal, and is fundamentally different from arbitrage trading. III. Transaction and Withdrawal Records Provide Sufficient Evidence of Compliance: From March 1st to April 1st, 2026, the main trading activity was London Gold, with a total trading volume of 11.55 lots. Positions were held for minutes to hours, exhibiting no ultra-short-term arbitrage characteristics. All trades were in the same trend, with no hedging or locking in positions. All four withdrawals during this period passed risk control review and were successfully credited. If the account had serious violations, it would be impossible to pass official risk control checks multiple times. IV. The Platform's Inconsistent Handling and Seriously Unfair Procedures: On March 30th, a $3000 withdrawal was approved but not credited, and the account was restricted. On April 2nd, after submitting records, the platform confirmed there were no violations and released the withdrawal. On April 3rd, subsequent withdrawals were rejected without cause. On April 7th, the account was directly frozen. For nearly two months since the beginning of April, the platform has provided zero effective response. I have been in daily contact with the account manager, and the platform has consistently used "processing" as an excuse to delay. It wasn't until May 11th, after more than a month of follow-up, that a vague and unsubstantiated "violation notice" was issued. Using the same account and the same strategy, the platform initially approved the transaction in compliance with regulations, then completely rejected it without any reasonable explanation. Two months passed with zero response, zero evidence, and zero explanation. The platform used delays instead of action, silence to evade its burden of proof, and a vague conclusion to attempt to legitimize its illegal appropriation of customer funds. This is not risk control; this is blatant default.