Crypto Exchange Bithumb’s Operator Closing Businesses

In a move announced on Friday, OKX, the Seychelles-headquartered cryptocurrency exchange, declared its decision to delist 20 trading pairs by Jan. 5, triggering a notable price fall for major privacy coins such as Monero, Dash and ZCash. The exchange cited that the affected pairs did not align with its listing criteria, though specific details were not disclosed.Photo by Khara Woods on UnsplashPrivacy coin delisting trendWhile OKX did not explicitly articulate the rationale behind this move, industry observers are speculating that it could be part of the exchange’s broader efforts to comply with evolving regulatory measures. Privacy coins have increasingly drawn regulatory scrutiny due to concerns about potential illicit activities within the crypto space. Earlier in the year, Binance had also announced the delisting of several privacy coins to ensure compliance with local laws and regulations. The broader context of regulatory pressures on privacy-focused cryptocurrencies seems to be impacting major exchanges’ decisions. In 2022, Huobi cited regulatory pressures when it took the decision to delist Monero and other privacy coins. Kraken was further ahead of the curve still, delisting Monero for UK customers in November 2021. Downward price actionFollowing OKX’s announcement on Friday, the prices of privacy-focused cryptocurrencies, notably Zcash (ZEC) and Monero (XMR), experienced a decline. The entire sector of “privacy cryptos” has witnessed a 7.1% decrease in overall market capitalization, according to an index of such coins compiled by Malaysian crypto indexing firm CoinGecko. During this period, Monero and Zcash have seen unit price declines of 4.5% and 10.7%, respectively. Other tokens set for delisting, including Dash, Powerpool and Horizen, have recorded declines of up to 14%. OKX has provided guidance to users, advising them to cancel orders related to the affected trading pairs before the delisting date to avoid automatic cancellation, a process that may take 1–3 working days. Concurrently, the exchange has halted deposits for the impacted cryptocurrencies and plans to cease withdrawals by Mar. 5, 2024, affording holders sufficient time to withdraw their assets. However, once the delisting is complete, trading these digital assets on OKX will become impossible. Interestingly, certain privacy coins like MINA continue to be listed on the exchange, experiencing a 7.5% increase following the delisting announcement. It’s crucial to note that OKX’s delisting is not exclusive to privacy tokens, as it also includes other trading pairs associated with digital assets such as Kusama, Flow, Kyber Network and Aragon. The fight for privacySome crypto community members have voiced their concerns on social media, with many fearing that the innovation may be ‘captured’ by the various state authorities over time. However, ex-Monero developer Ricardo Spagni (AKA “Fluffypony”) was nonchalant about the whole thing, judging by his comments. In a post on social media platform X, he wrote: ”Monero users and contributors literally couldn’t care less about delistings at this point.” As the regulatory landscape evolves, cryptocurrency exchanges are navigating these challenges, impacting the availability and value of specific tokens on their platforms. Investors and privacy advocates alike will be closely watching how such regulatory compliance measures continue to shape the crypto market and crypto use.  

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.

South Korea’s cryptocurrency market is moving through a period of stricter oversight and policy debate, while major industry players pursue overseas listings against a backdrop of falling market valuations and weaker investor sentiment.Photo by Ori Song on UnsplashAccording to Newsis, financial regulators are close to finalizing penalties for the country’s major crypto exchanges after a wide-ranging review of their compliance systems. The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) under the Financial Services Commission (FSC) is preparing to issue sanctions such as institutional warnings, fines, and personnel measures against platforms found to have breached anti-money laundering (AML) rules. These actions follow a series of on-site inspections that began in August 2024 with Dunamu, the operator of Upbit, and were later extended to Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax. Authorities plan to determine and announce penalties in the order of these inspections, which concluded in April 2025. Stablecoin debate growsAt the same time, a policy debate is unfolding in the parliament over how far South Korea should go in supporting digital asset innovation. The Maeil Business Newspaper reported that Democratic Party lawmaker Min Byoung-dug has questioned the Bank of Korea’s cautious stance on launching a won-backed stablecoin. The central bank has identified seven main risks associated with such an asset, including possible de-pegging and threats to monetary policy stability. Min argues that the bank is placing too much weight on these micro-level risks. In a recent report, he contended that delaying innovation could lead to larger, structural economic losses and said the risks identified by the central bank can be managed through oversight and product design rather than by avoiding stablecoins altogether. Dunamu–Naver deal targets NasdaqIn the corporate sector, major fintech firms are pushing ahead with international expansion plans. Naver Financial and Dunamu, which operates the Upbit exchange, have endorsed a merger plan involving a comprehensive share swap, according to The Herald Business. The share swap ratio has been set at 2.54 to 1. This development follows earlier reports that the two firms were close to an agreement intended to support a future Nasdaq listing in the United States. Bitcoin slide persistsThese regulatory, legislative, and corporate developments are taking place as market conditions deteriorate. Global data show weakening demand, with spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) recording about $3.5 billion in net outflows in November, according to Bloomberg, while CoinMarketCap data show Bitcoin prices down roughly 24% over the past month.  Domestic sentiment reflects this caution. In a weekly survey conducted by CoinNess and Cratos, 59.5% of South Korean investors said over the weekend that they expect Bitcoin prices to fall or crash this week, up from 43.6% a week earlier. Only 12.4% of respondents forecast a price increase. Views on the broader market cycle are also shifting. In the same survey, 42.9% of participants said they believe the bull market has already ended. Reflecting this sentiment, Alternative.me’s Crypto Fear & Greed Index is at 15, in the “Extreme Fear” zone as of Nov. 26.