Bitcoin pullback tests sentiment as analysts revisit long-term targets

Korea’s Changwon City Boosts Local Art Scene with NFTsOn Monday, South Korea’s Changwon City announced its plan to support local artists by promoting their work through non-fungible tokens (NFTs). This initiative aims to help artists adapt to the rapidly changing fine art industry, driven by state-of-the-art technology, and stay current with the latest trends.NFT ART in ChangwonThis project “NFT ART in Changwon” came to life after the city partnered with MetaGalaxia, a Korean NFT marketplace, earlier this year.Jung Hyun-sub, head of the city’s culture, tourism, and sports division, has encouraged local citizens to participate in the project and emphasized the city’s commitment to fostering the NFT industry, starting with a focus on local artworks.15 artistsThe application process for the project will run from May 1 to May 30, and 15 artists will be selected. Eligible applicants must be Changwon residents who have either majored or are currently majoring in fine arts or have publicly exhibited their artwork.Artists can submit various forms of artwork that can be turned into NFTs, including paintings, photographs, and videos. Those selected will benefit from registration as NFT artists on MetaGalaxia, digitization of their original artworks into NFTs, and promotion of their artworks and profiles across various social media platforms.© Pexels/Dom J

Korea’s FSC Opposes Other Agencies’ Involvement in Virtual Asset BillAhead of the National Assembly’s passage of the virtual asset bill, the Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC) has repeatedly opposed the involvement of the Bank of Korea (BOK) and the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) in regulating cryptocurrencies, according to the Korean newspaper Kukmin Ilbo.©Pexels/LukasFSC’s oppositionIn a document submitted to the National Assembly’s National Policy Committee, the FSC opposed stipulating the BOK’s right to request documents in the virtual asset bill. The agency argued that the bill is indirectly related to the BOK’s monetary and credit policy and that explicitly mentioning monetary and credit policy in the bill could lead to the misinterpretation of virtual assets as possessing the characteristics of currencies.The FSC also objected to stipulating the FSS’s right to inspect crypto enterprises. According to law, the purpose of the FSC is to inspect and supervise financial institutions. Explicitly stating the FSS’s right to inspect crypto enterprises could cause confusion to the public that they are financial entities.However, there are growing concerns about the FSC’s perceived intention to dominate virtual asset jurisdiction.At a small meeting held under the National Policy Committee last month, Lawmaker Yoon Han-hong of the ruling People Power Party expressed the view that the FSC should consider incorporating the BOK and the FSS in the virtual asset bill for crypto regulations. During the meeting, the FSC objected to the inclusion of a stipulation that excludes central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) from the definition of virtual assets. Meanwhile, the BOK agreed to include such a stipulation.Allowing class action suitsAccording to an internal document obtained by Kukmin Ilbo, the FSC also intends to allow class action suits for crypto investors. It seeks to add cryptocurrencies to a bill proposed for class action suits, which also deal with securities. Class action suits provide a means for victims to receive redress in cases where a representative is successful in winning the lawsuit against the offender.The FSC stated that it will follow the majority on the issue of whether the purpose of the virtual asset bill should include the phrase “to contribute to the development of the nation’s economy,” although it left a cautionary note that some might raise objections to this, considering the speculative nature of virtual assets.

Dispute Embroils Bitget in Legal Battle With Crypto InfluencerBitget, the crypto exchange registered in Seychelles, finds itself entangled in a legal dispute with prominent crypto influencer Evan Luthra.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashAccount freezing allegationsThe conflict stems from Luthra’s allegations of account freezing and loss of funds after a token listing incident in March. Luthra has filed a lawsuit against Bitget, accusing the exchange of withholding $200,000 in Tether (USDT) without adequate explanation, while also freezing his account.The legal drama follows Luthra’s involvement with the Reel Star project, where he served as an advisor for the platform which is aimed at creators. As compensation for his collaboration with the project, Luthra received Reel Token (REELT), the project’s utility token.Bitget alleged market manipulationUpon the listing of REELT tokens, Luthra reportedly sold 1.3 million tokens on Bitget. In response, Bitget claims it faced a manipulative attack orchestrated by a group of traders attempting to profit from market manipulation immediately after the token’s listing. This allegedly caused a significant drop in the token’s price, prompting Bitget’s decision to freeze Luthra’s account.Bitget states that it contacted Luthra seeking an explanation for the suspicious trading behavior. Luthra acknowledged the token sale but failed to provide satisfactory reasons for his actions, according to Bitget’s version of events. The exchange maintains that user protection is its foremost priority and that it takes swift action against illegal or fraudulent behaviors.$16 million damages claimLuthra refutes the allegations, asserting his innocence and citing alleged approval from Reel Star’s Co-Founder Navdeep Sharma for his token sale plans. He seeks a substantial $16 million in damages, in addition to the frozen funds. Luthra claims that Bitget unjustly deprived him of his tokens, asserting his status as a fully KYCed user entitled to access his holdings.In the aftermath of the incident, Bitget conducted an investigation and offered a compensation plan for affected clients. Gracy Chen, Bitget’s Managing Director, emphasized the exchange’s commitment to user protection and its actions against illicit activities on its platform. Addressing the matter on Twitter, Chen didn’t hold back in her commentary on Luthra, stating that he “has a history of fraudulent activities,” which she says were exposed by crypto journalist CoffeeZilla.The legal dispute has ignited debates within the crypto community. Supporters of Luthra contend that his case underscores broader issues faced by users of centralized exchanges, shedding light on the need for improved user rights and protection. On the other hand, some argue that Bitget acted appropriately to safeguard its users and the market integrity.CZ brought into the disputeThe legal battle has attracted attention from influential figures in the crypto industry. Against a backdrop of a very public airing of the dispute on Twitter, in a recent tweet Luthra invited Changpeng Zhao (CZ), the CEO of Binance, to respond to Luthra’s claim that Bitget spreads rumors about other exchanges. CZ was having none of it, writing: “You should talk to them, right? We are not a regulator for other exchanges.”The case highlights the intricate challenges surrounding market manipulation and token listings within the crypto space. As it unfolds, the outcome could potentially set a precedent for similar situations involving token listings, market manipulation, and user protection.