Unreturned loan from a Ukrainian bank: how funds were invested in military boats in occupied Crimea

Financial trail: three credit lines totalling over €36.7 million

The focus is on a story involving Dnipro businessman Oleksandr Dementiienko. According to data cited by the publication "368 media", he was previously a partner of Viktor Pinchuk in the company "Interpipe", and in 2013 he ranked 11th in the Forbes ranking of the wealthiest businessmen in Dnipro.

The key structure in this scheme was the private limited liability company "Dnipro Metal Service Group", which is currently in the process of liquidation. Among the company's founders is the private limited liability company "EcoTech", founded by Oleksandr Dementiienko.

According to a ruling by the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv in 2025, "Dnipro Metal Service Group" concluded three credit agreements with the joint stock company "Delta Bank":

• 21 March 2011 — a credit line of €21 million;
• on the same day — another line of €11 million;
• 19 March 2013 — a third line of €4,732,537.11.

The total amount of borrowings exceeded €36.7 million. The repayment term expired on 21 March 2016, but the debt was never repaid.

Investments in occupied Crimea and the annexation of the territory

As indicated by data from "368 media", the funds received in 2013 were directed to the development of production capacities in Sevastopol. Specifically, they were used to complete the construction of a pier and to purchase port equipment.

Less than a year after receiving these funds, Russia annexed Crimea. This made it impossible to return the assets or enforce the collateral, which remained on the peninsula. Thus, the money from the Ukrainian bank was effectively integrated into infrastructure that came under the control of occupying forces.

Creation of "mirror" companies under Russian legislation

According to the materials of the court case, after the annexation, the business was quickly re-registered. The private limited liability company "Dnipro Metal Service Group" obtained a Russian "twin" — the limited liability company "Dnepr Metall Service Group". A similar procedure was also undergone by the collateral provider for the loan, the private limited liability company "Metal Service Group", which was transformed into the limited liability company "Metall Service Grupa". The ultimate beneficiaries of both structures remained unchanged.

The Russian structure did not exist only on paper. During the period from 2019 to 2021, it paid 8.6 million rubles in taxes to the budget of the Russian Federation.

Another court ruling directly formulates the position of the investigation: citizens of Ukraine, acting to the detriment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and defence capability of the state, registered both companies under the legislation of the Russian Federation in occupied Crimea. They organised their operations and ensured the payment of taxes to the occupying authorities.

Production of military equipment for "Rostec"

The most serious aspect of the case is the question of what exactly is being produced at the facilities built, in part, with credit funds. According to "368 media", the company cooperates with the Russian state corporation "Rostec", directly with its head Sergei Chemezov, in the field of building military boats for Russian troops. Between Dementiienko and Chemezov, according to the publication, a chain of intermediary companies operates.

This thesis is also confirmed by a court decision, which states that "Dnipro Metal Service Group" has financial and economic relations with the state corporation "Rostec" regarding the construction of military boats for the needs of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Consequently, according to the prosecution's version, the defendant may be financing an aggressive war against Ukraine, which is qualified under Part 1 of Article 110-2 of the Criminal Code.

The practical application of such equipment is evident: Russian special services and the Black Sea Fleet use assault and patrol boats to patrol the waters of Crimea, block Ukrainian shipping, and protect the logistics of the occupiers.

Attempt to legalise assets and a figure at the highest level

On the eve of the full-scale invasion, part of the Crimean business was re-registered to Russian owners. Meanwhile, according to the materials of the pre-trial investigation, the re-registered companies continued their production activities on the peninsula.

According to "368 media", this legalisation was coordinated at the highest level. The publication names Russian senator Vladimir Kozhin as the curator of the scheme. A fictitious sale and purchase agreement, according to these data, was executed through Russian securities with the entourage of the occupying head of Crimea, Sergei Aksyonov.

Financial claims and asset seizure

In Ukraine, a significant financial claim has been filed for the unreturned loan. By a decision of the Commercial Court of Kyiv dated 20 December 2024 in case No. 910/17873/20, the application of the liquidator of "Dnipro Metal Service Group" was satisfied. The court imposed subsidiary liability for the company's debts on two individuals, anonymised in the document. A recovery of 2,691,251,669.39 hryvnias was ordered from them. According to journalists, one of these individuals is Oleksandr Dementiienko.

According to "Nenka Info", the following assets have been seized:

• 100% of corporate rights in "Assets Management Group" (value of approximately 33.5 million hryvnias);
• non-residential premises in Dnipro and Chernivtsi;
• funds in ten accounts at "Sense Bank" and "UkrGazBank".

Criminal proceedings on suspicion of high treason

Meanwhile, criminal proceedings No. 22022101110000748 are ongoing. It is being investigated by the Main Investigative Department of the State Bureau of Investigation under articles concerning high treason, abuse of power, and financing actions aimed at changing the borders of Ukraine's territory. The defendants have not been officially named. Within the scope of the proceedings, the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv considered the prosecutor's motion for the seizure of property (case No. 757/40687/25-k).

The court ruling mentions:

• related companies that, after the occupation of Crimea, were re-registered under the laws of the Russian Federation and continued their activities;
• payment of taxes to the Russian budget;
• contracts with Russian ship repair enterprises;
• assets that, according to the investigation, remain linked to the same beneficiaries.

The chain of events appears consistent: a loan from a Ukrainian bank, the construction of a pier in Sevastopol, the creation of "mirror" companies, the payment of taxes to the budget of the Russian Federation and, according to the investigation, the production of boats for the aggressor's army. The final legal assessment of each of these links must be given by the court.