Korean Blockchain Firm Proposes Fintech Collaboration in Cambodia

Hana Bank Enables Korean Art Collectors to Prove Ownership with NFTsHana Bank, one of South Korea’s largest banks, has announced a partnership with Trackchain, a Korean blockchain firm, to enhance digital art banking services based on Web3 technology, according to a press release.Photo by Debby Hudson on UnsplashArt banking and NFTsThe collaboration aims to develop and operate a platform that promotes art banking services, including the exhibition, advertisement, and distribution of artworks. Furthermore, the two entities will create non-fungible tokens (NFTs) to verify the ownership of artworks and introduce artwork custody products. They will also explore and construct business models that integrate finance and blockchain technology.Bank’s custody serviceHana Bank, recognized as a leader in art banking, has already established a comprehensive custody service that ensures secure management, storage, and liquidation of art collections. Through this partnership, Hana Bank plans to refine NFT technology, which will provide transaction history and ownership verification for artworks. The objective is to enhance transparency and convenience for art collectors during the trading process.Visitors who purchase artworks by Artist Cho Sung-hee at an exhibition hall in Gangnam, Seoul, and choose to store them in Hana Bank’s custody will receive NFTs issued by Trackchain. These NFTs serve as proof of ownership, authenticating the artworks. Cho Sung-hee is known for her collage works created with Korea’s traditional hanji paper, made from laminated sheets. The exhibition will run from July 4 to 28.Additionally, purchasers of the displayed artworks will receive Cho’s digital art NFTs. Meanwhile, customers who use Hana Bank’s mobile app, Hana 1Q, to create their own artworks will earn corresponding NFTs.Kim Young-hun, Head of Hana Bank’s Wealth Management Unit, expressed enthusiasm about their Web3-based art banking service, emphasizing that it will facilitate easier art purchases and provide enhanced security for managing art collections. Kim also stated that the bank intends to expand its services further to deliver exceptional cultural experiences.

Singapore Judge Says Crypto Not MoneyIn recent years, legal processes in various jurisdictions worldwide have seen judges comment on whether cryptocurrency is actually money. The latest such determination has been made by Justice Vinodh Coomaraswamy who outlined in a Singapore court that while being a component of financial transactions, cryptocurrencies are not money.The consideration emerged in a recent court hearing at Singapore’s High Court in a case involving the Algorand Foundation and failed Singapore-based hedge fund, Three Arrows Capital (3AC). Justice Coomaraswamy’s comments arose due to a discussion in the midst of the court proceedings involving the Judge and counsel representing the Algorand Foundation.©Pexels/EKATERINA BOLOVTSOVASeashells as moneyIn setting out his rationale for the need for 3AC to be wound up, Daniel Chan, a lawyer for the WongPartnership law firm that was representing the Algorand Foundation in the proceedings, told the judge that despite foreign currencies not being recognized as legal tender in Singapore, or used broadly as a medium of exchange within the city state, those foreign currencies are recognized by Singapore law as money. Using that analogy Chan suggested that by implication, the same scenario should be considered where cryptocurrencies are concerned.The judge provided a counterpoint: “What if you had a [community] in the world that used seashells as its internal medium of exchange? Would the Singapore courts have to recognize that as money.” Chan claimed that the judge had used an extreme example although Coomaraswamy remained steadfast in his view, pointing out that seashells had indeed been used as a form of money in the distant past.Coomaraswamy proceeded to dismiss the Algorand Foundation’s winding up application. He acknowledged that the Foundation did have standing in bringing the application. However, as he determined that cryptocurrency couldn’t be classed as money, on that basis he dismissed the application. In conveying his decision, he stated: “The word indebtedness, in my view, must require a debt which is in fiat currency. Determining whether or not a particular intangible, such as cryptocurrency, is money would require a detailed examination of evidence which is not appropriate in the context of insolvency.”Legal tenderThus far, bitcoin has been recognized as legal tender in two countries — El Salvador and the Central African Republic. In 2020, a French court referred to the leading cryptocurrency as money, agreeing that Bitcoin loans can be recognized as customer loans in the same way as loans denominated in fiat currencies. Earlier that year, an Australian court recognized bitcoin as a legally legitimate form of investment. In the United States, a Federal court recognized bitcoin as “money” or “funds” in a prosecution taken against Silk Road website operator Ross Ulbricht.There have been many similar instances in courts globally where judges have had to grapple with the consideration of whether bitcoin and crypto more generally can be regarded as money. Similar to the difficulty authorities are having in regulating cryptocurrency, it’s an issue that in most cases lacks complete clarity and in which we can expect further discussions on, similar to this most recent consideration in the Singaporean high court.

Korea’s FSS to Collect Public Comments on Financial Statement Guidelines for Virtual Asset EntitiesThe South Korean Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) has revealed a set of exemplary financial statements aimed at clarifying the disclosure requirements of virtual asset-related entities. These guidelines have been designed to align with the Korean version of International Financial Reporting Standards (K-IFRS), which was established by the Korea Accounting Institute (KAI).It was reported earlier this month that the Financial Services Commission (FSC) brought forward these regulations to tackle accounting uncertainties within the blockchain industry.The main goal of these exemplary guidelines is to help entities provide financial statement readers with essential information regarding virtual assets. This includes details about the reserve amount held by virtual asset issuers and information about the virtual assets held by virtual asset service providers (VASPs).Photo by Kelly Sikkema on UnsplashPresentation sessionsTo ensure effective dissemination and understanding of these guidelines, the FSS, KAI, and the Korean Institute of Certified Public Accountants (KICPA) have planned presentation sessions. These sessions will take place from July 26 to August 11, which will involve visits to VASPs, listed companies, and accounting firms. Valuable feedback and suggestions from these stakeholders are anticipated, as the events encourage open two-way communication and welcome participation from anyone interested.Discussion meetingsTo further refine the ideas put forward during the presentation sessions, two separate discussion meetings with experts are scheduled for September and October. The recommendations gathered from the industry will undergo a careful review by experts and be thoughtfully incorporated into the guidelines.The FSS will finalize the guidelines in cooperation with the FSC, and the Securities and Futures Commission under the FSC will review them and give approval for their implementation. This is expected to take place between October and November.The FSC has stated that these exemplary guidelines are currently in their preliminary stage and open to potential changes during the public comment period. Additionally, companies have the flexibility to make necessary adjustments to these practice guidelines to suit their specific needs and requirements.Issuers, holders, exchangesThe exemplary practice guidelines are specifically targeted at three types of entities: virtual asset issuers, virtual asset holders, and virtual asset trading exchanges.For virtual asset issuers, providing essential information about their virtual assets is a key requirement. This information should encompass their business models, accounting policies, obligations (e.g. whitepapers), and the current status of their projects. Such details should be disclosed in the annotations of their financial statements. Furthermore, revenue generated from the sales of virtual assets must be recognized, and any changes to their obligations should be duly noted. Moreover, disclosure of the reserved amount of issued virtual assets and their intended usage plan is mandatory.Companies holding virtual assets must provide information regarding accounting policies, the total value of assets held, the reasons behind their holdings, and any gains or losses incurred. Additionally, holders are obligated to disclose risks associated with virtual assets and their potential impact.Virtual asset trading platforms, such as exchanges, are mandated to disclose not only their own virtual asset holdings but also those held on behalf of their customers. This disclosure should encompass detailed information about their accounting policies, the total value of assets under their custody, associated risks, and the involvement of third-party custodians. In particular, the platforms must indicate whether they treat customer assets under their custody as assets or liabilities and provide a clear rationale for such classification in the annotations of their financial statements.