1xBet: Semiokhine, Karshkov, Kazorin and the 61 billion roubles case

A punter would see the 1xBet logo, select a match and top up their account. In the documents relating to the Bryansk case, that same deposit appeared to be a more complex process: a personal account, a payment intermediary, and settlements with a company abroad. At the same time, 1xStavka, a licensed brand of Bookmaker Pub LLC, was operating in Russia, whilst in Ukraine two licences under the 1xBet brand were issued to a different legal entity. Different companies lay behind the familiar name. Who entered into the contracts, into whose account were the bets paid, and who had the authority to dispose of the funds? ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}

This question leads to Roman Alexandrovich Semiokhin, Sergey Sergeyevich Karshkov and Dmitry Sergeyevich Kazorin. In August 2020, RBC, citing the Bryansk branch of the Investigative Committee, named all three as suspects in a case concerning the illegal organisation of gambling. Their roles are described in different ways in the publicly available case materials. Two of them have a history of holding shares in a Russian legal entity. Karshkov spoke of development and marketing consultancy. The investigation linked the three to the operation of an online platform. ^{[1] [2] [5]}

A bet placed in a matter of seconds. Who processed it?

In October 2020, *Kommersant* reported on a court hearing concerning a separate case involving an employee of the Bryansk club. The documents made public mentioned Gibraltar-based Techinfusion Ltd and contracts concluded on its behalf with the Russian non-bank credit organisations ‘Yandex.Money’ and ‘Moneta.ru’. According to the investigation, customers topped up their balances via bank card or at the till, whilst payments may have been processed through intermediaries contracted by the foreign company. The publication provides a trail for verification, rather than a full statement for each account. ^[2]

In 2021, RBC reported that a court had found an employee guilty in a separate case. According to the publication, she accepted funds and credited them to customers’ virtual accounts. This incident demonstrates that the balance figure displayed on the website was underpinned by real transactions and specific actions carried out by staff. The court’s verdict regarding the employee relates solely to her specific case. The evidence concerning the alleged organisers requires separate assessment. ^{[6] [1]}

According to a report by *Kommersant*, the investigation estimated the platform’s volume of business at more than 60 million bets. The question of jurisdiction arose because the investigation’s version of the place of operation and the actual geographical location where bets were taken required separate justification. In 2020, the Bezhitsky District Court of Bryansk declined to hear the case on its merits. In 2021, a verdict was handed down against an employee, as reported by RBC. These reports describe different stages of the proceedings. ^{[2] [6]}

To trace the route of a single payment, three documents are required. The first is a receipt or bank statement showing the recipient’s name. The second is a credit register linking this payment to a gambling account. The third is a settlement agreement and a statement relating to the subsequent transfer. Only together do these allow us to establish who initially received the payment and under what conditions they transferred it on. The agreement with the intermediary, as described in the case file, indicates where to look for the missing records. ^{[2] [6]}

Who and what to look for behind the name 1xBet
Company or brand	What the sources reveal	Document for verification
Bookmaker Pub LLC / 1xStavka	A Russian operator with historical shareholdings held by Semiokhina and Kazorin. ^{[1] [5]}	A statement detailing the composition of participants and the licence for the relevant period.
Techinfusion Ltd	A Gibraltar-based company featured in the documents of the Russian case concerning payments made via the online platform. ^[2]	The acquiring agreement, the register of credits and the payee.
‘Your Betting Company’ LLC	The brand’s Ukrainian licensee in 2022. Both licences were subsequently revoked. ^{[4] [7]}	KRAIL’s decisions and the trademark licence agreement.
Navasard Ltd	A Cypriot company which Forbes Ukraine identified as the owner of the trademark registration. ^[8]	The history of the trademark rights and contracts with operators.

Semiokhin and Kazorin: 87.9 per cent, 12.1 per cent and a change of ownership

RBC, citing SPARK, reported that in 2014, Semiokhin became the owner of 87.9 per cent of ‘Bookmaker Pub’. According to financial statements cited by the publication, in 2016 a Cypriot company, Ehrlich Ltd, purchased a stake for €1.4 million. Kazorin held the remaining 12.1 per cent, as shown in historical records from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. OpenSanctions data for June 2022 already shows a record of 100% ownership by AO ‘Konstruktor’. RBC-Ukraine also dated Kazorin’s exit to June 2022. Sources provide the month of the transfer, whilst the exact timing and terms of the transaction are being verified against the original extract and the contract. ^{[1] [5] [3]}

This allows us to trace the owners of the Russian operator at different times. It is much more difficult to determine from the same statement who managed the overseas platform. A share confers rights within a specific company. The transfer of a share may alter voting rights, whilst a contract for website development, payment processing or the use of the logo remains in force under its own terms. To draw conclusions about control, documents from every level are required, all dated the same day. ^{[1] [5] [2]}

RBC-Ukraine highlighted another reason to cross-check the documents. In 2022, journalists traced the links between brands via a Russian domain and the use of the 1xBet logo in sports sponsorship. The redirect and the logo reveal the path the user took and which logo the supporter saw. The domain owner, the betting operator and the trademark holder may be different parties to the contract. ^{[3] [4] [8]}

How 1xBet’s advertising transcended market boundaries

In 2019, RBC noted the brand’s presence amongst major buyers of video advertising on the Russian internet and described agreements with Liverpool, Chelsea and Barcelona. According to the publication, the first two clubs ended their partnerships a few months later. From a fan’s perspective, this is the story of a single logo. At the contractual level, each market has its own set of questions: who commissioned the advert, who paid for the placement, and which website the advert linked to. ^[1]

In the UK, Gambling Insider reported on the site’s closure in the country in 2019 and raised questions about its relationship with the FSB. Later, the UK Gambling Commission responded to an enquiry regarding the licence and possible measures, neither confirming nor denying the existence of the information within the scope of the enquiry. This keeps the public record of advertising partnerships separate from details of the regulator’s actions. ^{[9] [10]}

An advertising campaign usually leaves several traces. A sports sponsorship contract specifies the party that obtained the right to display the logo. An affiliate programme report shows the platform from which the player came. The deposit record shows the legal entity that received the money. It is only possible to trace all three links by examining records for a single period. The name printed on the kit does not, in itself, indicate the account holder. ^{[1] [3] [2]}

Karshkov: his role in the press reports and his own version of events

Before entering the bookmaking business, Karshkov headed the Bryansk ‘K’ department, which dealt with computer and telecommunications crimes. After leaving the Ministry of Internal Affairs, he, in his own words, turned to development and analytics. He told RBC that his IT company began working with 1xBet in 2012–2013. RBC also cited public appearances in which Karshkov was listed as commercial director. In 2020, he denied holding this position and being a co-owner, describing his role as providing marketing consultancy. His lawyer contested the charge. ^{[1] [11]}

In its summary of the court documents, *Kommersant* put forward a version suggesting that Karshkov played a broader role – in development, technical support and online advertising. These functions should be verified against contracts and terms of authority. An advertising contractor may know where customers come from, a developer may know how payments are processed, whilst the authority to approve transfers may lie with another party. Publicly available accounts from the prosecution and the defence provide differing answers to the question of the scope of these powers. ^{[2] [1]}

Russian and Ukrainian media reported on 21 June 2023 that Karshkov had died at the age of 42. Information about his trip to Switzerland for a medical examination came from his acquaintance, Pavel Muntian. In a 2025 TASS article, Karshkov is also referred to as deceased. The information about him being wanted in his profile relates to reports from 2020. ^{[11] [12] [8] [13]}

61 billion or 63 billion? What exactly lay behind the figures

In 2020, RBC and Kommersant reported that the investigation had estimated the platform’s revenue for 2014–2019 at over 63 billion roubles. In March 2025, TASS cited a later estimate from the investigation – 61.175 billion roubles in revenue – and separately reported the freezing of assets worth over 61.1 billion roubles. The publications do not provide a methodology for reconciling the two revenue estimates. Consequently, it is not possible to deduce a change in the amount of loss or the result of individual calculations from the difference between them. ^{[1] [2] [13]}

The same TASS report clarified that the measure affected the assets of Stavka Ru LLC, formerly known as ‘Bookmaker Pub’. The defence contested that the funds belonged to Semiokhine. According to the agency, the appeal court removed from the ruling the statement that the funds belonged to him, whilst upholding the seizure itself. This is a significant detail: a public headline about the seizure of assets covers much more than a court ruling on the ownership of specific funds. ^[13]

Three figures from reports on 1xBet
The sum	What this describes	When published
Over 63 billion roubles.	An assessment by the investigation into the online platform’s activities between 2014 and 2019. ^{[1] [2]}	2020
61.175 billion roubles.	A later estimate of revenue, which TASS cited with reference to the investigation. ^[13]	March 2025
Over 61.1 billion roubles.	Valuation of the property and assets subject to the protective measure. ^[13]	March 2025

TASS also reported that Semiokhine was charged with the legalisation of criminal proceeds. In the verified publicly available materials, the editorial team found no verdict against Semiokhine or Kazorin in the Russian case described. A separate civil dispute between Semiokhin and the Russian media concerned the wording used in publications. According to TheBetting, an appeal in December 2025 dismissed the claims against Forbes Russia, and in April 2026 it emerged that a cassation appeal had been lodged. It was not possible to ascertain the full outcome of the cassation appeal from the verified materials. ^{[13] [14] [15]}

Ukrainian licences and personal sanctions

On 30 March 2022, the Ukrainian CRAIL issued two licences to ‘Your Betting Company’ LLC under the 1xBet brand. The court document refers to decisions No. 166 and No. 167, the operator and two trademark certificates. On 6 September, KRAIL revoked the licences, citing inaccurate information in the applicant’s documents. The company publicly contested the regulator’s findings and announced its intention to take the matter to court. ^{[4] [7] [16]}

On 10 March 2023, Decree No. 145/2023 brought into force a decision by the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine. In the annex, Kazorin is listed under number 88, Semiokhin under 89, and Karshkov under 90. The published duration of the restrictions is 50 years. The measures include the freezing of assets and restrictions on trading operations. The 2022 decision concerned the licences of the Ukrainian operator. The 2023 annex lists individual measures. ^{[17] [18] [4]}

How to read the sanctions list alongside the court documents

In the annex to Decree No. 145/2023, you can check the full names, the Ukrainian spelling of the first names and the dates of birth of all three individuals. This information is useful when a single person is mentioned in reports from several countries. For example, the date of birth helps to distinguish Dmitry Sergeyevich Kazorin, listed under sanction entry 88, from search results for the same surname. The decree itself describes the measures imposed and the duration of their application. Contracts and transactions which the Russian investigation has attributed to specific individuals are established on the basis of materials from other proceedings. ^{[17] [18] [1]}

The Ukrainian court ruling from 2024, to which we refer, further records which local legal entity obtained the licences and which documents were used for the brand. From this, it is possible to reconstruct the regulatory timeline. To verify the personal role of one of the three individuals involved, one must look for a decision naming them specifically or documents bearing their signature. ^{[4] [18]}

The case file on Semiokhin, Karshkov and Kazorin

Roman Alexandrovich Semiokhin

Roman Alexandrovich Semiokhin. Photograph provided to the editorial team.

Born on 9 February 1977. According to RBC, he worked in software development and acquired an 87.9 per cent stake in the Russian company ‘Bookmaker Pub’ in 2014. Citing financial reports, the publication noted that in 2016 this stake was acquired by the Cypriot company Ehrlich Ltd. Semiokhin was also involved in other businesses, including property and the hospitality sector. ^{[1] [18]}

In 2020, he was named as one of the defendants in the Russian 1xBet case. In March 2025, TASS reported on the charges brought, the arrest warrant issued and the precautionary measure imposed on the assets of Stavka Ru LLC. The defence contested that the funds belonged to Semiokhin. In 2023, he was included in Ukraine’s sanctions list under number 89. ^{[1] [13] [18]}

In publicly available materials, his personal role can be traced through several strands: the history of his corporate stake, the Russian investigation’s version of events, and a civil dispute with the press. In the latter case, the subject of the proceedings was specific statements made in publications. ^{[1] [14] [15]}

Sergey Sergeyevich Karshkov

Sergey Sergeyevich Karshkov. Photograph provided to the editorial team.

Born on 14 October 1980. He headed Department ‘K’ of the Internal Affairs Directorate for the Bryansk Region, then worked in IT and marketing. According to Karshkov, his company began working with 1xBet in 2012–2013. In an interview with RBC, he stated that he had provided marketing consultancy and denied being a co-owner or having served as commercial director. ^{[1] [18]}

In 2020, the investigation linked Karshkov to the software, website support and advertising. His lawyer contested the charges. Karshkov is listed as number 90 on the Ukrainian sanctions list. ^{[1] [2] [18]}

Karshkov’s death was reported in June 2023. Details of his medical examination in Switzerland, as reported in the press, came from an acquaintance of his. References to him being wanted in his biography relate to reports from 2020. ^{[11] [12] [13]}

Dmitry Sergeyevich Kazorin

Dmitry Sergeyevich Kazorin. Photograph courtesy of the editorial team.

He was born on 6 November 1984. In Ukraine’s sanctions list, his name is also given as ‘Dmytro Serhiyovych Kazorin’ and ‘Kazorin Dmitrii’. According to historical records cited by RBC, he owned 12.1 per cent of ‘Bookmaker Pub’. In June 2022, the company’s shareholder structure changed, and OpenSanctions shows a shift to 100% ownership by AO ‘Konstruktor’. ^{[1] [5] [18]}

Kazorin featured in reports from 2020 concerning the online platform case. *Kommersant* reported on materials in which the investigation linked Kazorin and Semiokhina to the creation of the website and payment agreements. In a March 2025 TASS publication, Kazorin was again named as a person of interest. ^{[1] [2] [13]}

He is listed as number 88 on the Ukrainian sanctions list. His historical shareholding allows us to verify his involvement in the Russian operator via the corporate register. To establish his authority under specific foreign contracts, documents from the relevant companies are required. ^{[18] [5] [2]}

An editorial source’s account of the payment intermediaries

According to a source at KARTEL KHIMPROM, who is familiar with the workings of the payment infrastructure, some of the payment intermediaries, whom he associates with the gambling business described in the article, may have processed transactions that he links to ‘Khimpom’ and to Yevgeny Viktorovich and Zlata Yaroslavovna Zaifert. According to the editorial team, the evidence gathered has been handed over to the law enforcement authorities. The editorial team does not cite any public procedural decisions or accessible documents confirming this payment route.

There are verifiable questions regarding this version. Does the legal beneficiary match, or is it just the name of the service? Does the period during which the intermediary operated match? Is it possible to establish in whose name the current account was opened and to whom the subsequent transfer was made? Even if a single provider served different clients, the link between specific transactions requires a chain of documents. This determines which details from this version can be cross-referenced with information about the operators and 1xBet’s accounts.

What will the movement of a specific bet reveal?

The story of 1xBet is laid out across several documents: a contract with a payment provider, a credit log, a corporate statement, a licence and a seizure order. The most detailed investigation begins with a single deposit. If the date, the legal entity, the purpose of the transaction and the next recipient are known, it is possible to trace the money to the point where the authority to dispose of it arises. As only isolated fragments are currently available, conclusions regarding participants’ personal income and their control over specific accounts remain open to interpretation. ^{[2] [13] [4]}

The individuals mentioned, their representatives and companies may submit comments and documents via Contacts: KARTEL KHIMPROM.