SC Ventures and Deutsche Bank Execute Stablecoin Payments via UDPN

SK Planet and Milk Partners to Propel Blockchain Ecosystem DevelopmentSouth Korean tech company SK Planet announced today a partnership with Milk Partners, the operator of MiL.k, a blockchain-based reward points platform, in order to foster the UPTN blockchain ecosystem. That’s according to a report by local news outlet Edaily. This alliance comes after conglomerate SK Group’s affiliate recently launched its new non-fungible token (NFT) membership program called “Road to Rich.”Photo by Karolina Grabowska on PexelsSK Planet’s NFT initiativeRoad to Rich is an initiative within OK Cashbag, SK Planet’s popular reward points system. In an effort to promote this initiative, the two companies will organize a Road to Rich event on the MiL.k app this month and enable users to exchange between OK Cashbag points and MiL.k points later this year.Milk Partners’ tech contributionMilk Partners’ parent company, Keyinside, has contributed to the development of SK Planet’s blockchain platform UPTN and has been involved in OK Cashbag’s NFT project, providing business consulting and technology development. UPTN, built on the Avalanche network’s subnet, made its debut through OK Cashbag’s NFT initiative, and a dedicated wallet based on UPTN was recently launched.Kim Kyo-soo, the head of the customer experience division at SK Planet, said that the company plans to build the UPTN ecosystem where customers can enjoy various services, including membership benefits, concert tickets, and shopping.Milk Partners CEO Cho Jung-min expressed enthusiasm about the synergies that can be achieved by participating as a major partner in the blockchain project spearheaded by Korea’s major corporate. He added that the two sides will work together to offer valuable and beneficial services to users.

The Legal Future of South Korea’s Crypto Industry: Necessary Legislation and SystemsA recent National Assembly symposium organized by South Korea’s Digital Asset Policy Forum brought experts together to discuss the challenges and prospects of the implementation of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act at the National Assembly Members’ Office Building in Seoul on Tuesday.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashInternational modelsReferences were made to global examples, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) — the world’s first standalone virtual asset legislation enacted in the EU — which ensures transparency, disclosure, authorization, and supervision of crypto-asset transactions. However, unlike the capital market, MiCA does not impose regular disclosure reporting requirements or corrections on them. Firms in Japan, on the other hand, are asked to provide disclosure under autonomous regulation through the Japan Virtual and Crypto Assets Exchange Association (JVCEA).Notably, in its recent Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets Consultation Report, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) states that it is “seeking to encourage optimal consistency in the way crypto-asset markets and securities markets are regulated within individual IOSCO jurisdictions, in accordance with the principle of ‘same activities, same risks, same regulatory outcomes’.” This principle refers to the concept that any crypto-asset activity that has a similar function and poses similar risks to those in the traditional financial system — such as operating a trading platform or providing custody services — is subject to regulation that ensures equivalent outcomes, as defined by the UK Parliament.The IOSCO report also suggests that crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) should disclose information regarding ownership and control of crypto-assets, issuer and business-related information, issuer management teams, transaction history and operational description of crypto-assets, token ownership concentration, transfer protocols, and a given CASP’s treatment of the client crypto-assets and their respective rights and entitlements during events like hard forks and airdrops.Hurdles to overcomeExperts at the forum reflected these considerations in their sentiments. Han Suh-hee, a lawyer at Barun Law Firm, emphasized that it is important to determine what kind of information should be disclosed. She argued that it is necessary to discuss to what extent information about virtual asset issuers should be disclosed and whether mandating firms to disclose their financial and business conditions is efficient.In particular, Han underlined the need to consider the differences between virtual assets and stocks when establishing a framework for the disclosure of virtual assets holdings. Unlike stocks, virtual assets possess distinctive characteristics like their borderless and decentralized nature, unclear issuer backgrounds, and the ability to conduct peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions.Lee Han-jin, a lawyer at Kim & Chang Law Firm, added that the enactment of Korea’s Virtual Asset User Protection Act was aimed at establishing a system directly targeted at regulating virtual assets and virtual asset service operators (VASPs) — a significant development from the Financial Transaction Reporting Act, which had until now been the only legal framework responsible for regulating VASPs along with other entities like casino business operators. Virtual assets are now subject to a more systematized regulatory approach.However, he said that the Virtual Asset User Protection Act still has its setbacks because it is undergoing a two-stage legislative process. Lee criticized the fact that the same definition of VASPs outlined in the Financial Transaction Reporting Act had been brought over, which limits their identity to transaction intermediaries, wallet operators, and custodians while overlooking their other roles like crypto management, crypto deposits, and crypto collective investments.Lee also pointed out another weakness: the scope of prohibition on using undisclosed information and market manipulation is broader in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act than in the Capital Markets Act. He argued that enforcement decrees should stipulate the definition of insiders and exceptional cases when deliberating on the prohibition of insider virtual asset trading.Lee thus emphasized the need for a clear definition of virtual assets in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, as it is yet unclear whether they are objects or assets. All things considered, he believes there must be a law that can encompass blockchain-based decentralization, outline the similarities and differences between digital assets and financial products, and accommodate new services that utilize smart contracts.“We are in the process of creating a regulatory system similar to those being adopted in other countries based on their respective markets,” said Lee Seok-ran, head of the Financial Innovation Bureau at the Financial Services Commission (FSC). “Unlike the stock market, which is equipped with regulations to prevent fraudulent transactions and misconduct, virtual assets are traded on multiple exchanges, so we are considering how to interpret unfair trading activities and conduct market surveillance.”She explained that the commission is prioritizing user protection measures and subordinate regulations. “I believe we will be able to create a system for subordinate regulations on disclosure once an overall global trajectory is established. But before that happens, we are working on guidelines for defining unfair trading activities with regulators and the Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA).” Unfair trading activities associated with virtual assets include not only those conducted on exchanges but also under other circumstances.The FSC officer said that the financial authority is set to establish legal criteria to distinguish cases such as false statements in white papers of crypto projects. She added that enforcement decrees will define both the conditions for restricting deposits and withdrawals on crypto exchanges and the corresponding limits.

Ant Group Restructuring With Implications for BlockchainAnt Group, an affiliate company of Chinese conglomerate Alibaba, is understood to be undertaking a significant restructuring that could have broader implications for the digital asset industry.Photo by Shubham Dhage on UnsplashPotential IPOAccording to a recent report published by Bloomberg, the company is contemplating a separation of its blockchain and database management services, as well as its international business, from its core financial operations in China. It’s being speculated that the move is a precursor to Ant Group’s application for a financial holding license in China. Furthermore, it could be part of a bid to revive its suspended initial public offering (IPO) in Hong Kong.The company had been under regulatory scrutiny from the Chinese authorities over the course of the past three years. That investigation culminated in a hefty fine of 7.12 billion yuan ($995 million). The consequences of that regulatory investigation have taken a toll on the company’s valuation, plunging from a peak of $280 billion before the IPO cancellation in 2020 to a current estimated value of $79 billion.Blockchain business implicationsBy pursuing this restructuring, Ant Group seeks to refocus on its core financial services within China. It’s unclear what the outcome will be for non-core businesses such as blockchain-based ventures. Potentially spinning these businesses off could unlock hidden value in blockchain-related activities. However, such a move would also raise questions regarding the future of these non-core businesses and their potential impact on the broader digital asset industry.AntChain, the blockchain technology developed by Ant Group, holds a prominent position in China, being widely adopted across various sectors. Should Ant Group decide to spin off or divest this business, it could significantly alter the blockchain landscape in the country.Originally introduced as “Ant Blockchain” in 2017 alongside Alipay, AntChain expanded its services to provide blockchain-as-a-Service (BaaS) to Ant Group’s partners in 2018. In mid-2020, Ant Group took a step further by transforming Ant Blockchain into a separate entity and rebranding it as AntChain. Besides blockchain solutions, AntChain is also actively involved in developing Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT), risk control technologies, and other value-added tech services.The wide adoption of Ant Group’s blockchain technology has played a pivotal role in promoting blockchain implementation in China. Last year the company unveiled a blockchain storage engine called Letus, as a mechanism to lower storage costs of blockchain networks. Another project saw it partner with a Malaysian investment bank in an effort to develop a crypto trading and portfolio management app. These are individual instances of the company’s varied activities in the blockchain space.Any alterations to its blockchain operations could impact the pace and scale of blockchain adoption in the country. While the Chinese authorities have discouraged crypto trading and mining, they have very much encouraged blockchain development.The restructuring appears to be a response to the increasing regulatory pressures in the fintech industry. A further tightening of regulations on blockchain operations for fintech companies might potentially hinder innovation and growth in the sector.Most likely the guiding hand of the government in China will have a material effect on how these blockchain-based businesses develop in the event of an Ant Group restructuring that would see them being spun out.