South Korea Delays Digital Asset Basic Law to 2026

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2025-12-31Last updated on 2025-12-31

Abstract

South Korea has postponed the implementation of its Digital Asset Basic Law to 2026 due to regulatory disagreements, primarily between the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea, over stablecoin oversight. The legislation, intended to establish a foundational crypto regulatory framework, aims to enhance investor protection through stricter rules, including no-fault liability for operators and reserve requirements for stablecoin issuers. However, disputes over enforcement authority and reserve management have stalled progress, creating uncertainty for crypto firms. The ruling party has proposed consolidating various proposals into a revised bill, with a focus on developing a Korean won-backed stablecoin to counter dollar-dominated stablecoins.

South Korea has delayed its Digital Asset Basic Law till 2026, as regulators are still divided over stablecoin oversight authority, as revealed by legislative sources. The policymakers have halted the crypto legislation as the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea carry on clashing over control of stablecoin reserves and enforcement responsibilities, making regulatory uncertainty in one of Asia’s biggest crypto markets.

The Digital Asset Basic Law is made in a way to be the foundation of South Korea’s cryptocurrency regulatory framework. The legislation is focused on strengthening investor protection by putting robust and strict legal regulations on digital asset operators as per the draft bill.

The prominent offer includes the introduction of no-fault liability, making operators responsible for user losses even without determined negligence. The draft also needs stablecoin issuers to keep reserves surpassing 100% of circulating supply kept at banks or dignified institutions and different from the issuer’s balance sheet to restrict contagion risks.

Stablecoin oversight came as the major point of contention between regulators. At the same time, the authorities widely agree on the requirement of stronger supervision; they haven’t reached consensus on the basis of responsibilities for preserved rule enforcement and licensing authority.

The Non-Agreement

The non-agreement has entangled decisions over enforcement powers with the treatment of reserve assets, pushing authorities to delay the bill instead of advancing legislation having unresolved structural issues.

The delay further creates an uncertainty for crypto firms of South Korea, together with exchanges, payment providers and stablecoin issuers. If the regulatory framework is not complete, then it may affect the product launches, investment decisions, and operational planning, as said by industry observers.

The ruling party has planned to consolidate various policymaker proposals into a revised digital asset bill. The president of the Democratic Party, Lee Jae Myung, has recognised that a Korean won-supported stablecoin is a national priority, declaring it could be against the dominance of US dollar-linked stablecoins in global crypto markets, as per the statements from the presidential office.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Bitcoin Slides Below $90K as Spot BTC ETFs Record $780M in Outflows

TagsbillCrypto BillSouth Korea

Related Questions

QWhy has South Korea delayed the implementation of its Digital Asset Basic Law until 2026?

ASouth Korea has delayed the Digital Asset Basic Law to 2026 because regulators, specifically the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea, are divided over stablecoin oversight authority, including control of stablecoin reserves and enforcement responsibilities.

QWhat is the primary purpose of the Digital Asset Basic Law according to the draft bill?

AThe primary purpose of the Digital Asset Basic Law is to serve as the foundation of South Korea's cryptocurrency regulatory framework, with a focus on strengthening investor protection by imposing robust and strict legal regulations on digital asset operators.

QWhat are two key provisions included in the draft of the Digital Asset Basic Law?

ATwo key provisions are: 1) The introduction of no-fault liability, making operators responsible for user losses even without determined negligence. 2) A requirement for stablecoin issuers to keep reserves exceeding 100% of the circulating supply, held at banks or dignified institutions and kept separate from the issuer's balance sheet.

QHow does the regulatory delay impact crypto firms in South Korea?

AThe delay creates uncertainty for crypto firms, including exchanges, payment providers, and stablecoin issuers. It may affect their product launches, investment decisions, and operational planning until a complete regulatory framework is established.

QWhat national priority regarding stablecoins was recognized by the president of the Democratic Party, Lee Jae Myung?

ALee Jae Myung recognized the creation of a Korean won-supported stablecoin as a national priority, stating it could counter the dominance of US dollar-linked stablecoins in global crypto markets.

Related Reads

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Nationals from Using Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Access to Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal On June 12th, the U.S. government ordered AI company Anthropic to immediately suspend all foreign access—including foreign nationals within the U.S. and Anthropic's own foreign employees—to its newly released Fable 5 and Mythos 5 AI models, citing national security concerns. This forced Anthropic to temporarily disable access to both models for all users globally, as it cannot technically differentiate user nationality at scale. The models, released just three days prior, represent Anthropic's highest public capability tier. Fable 5 is the first publicly available model from the advanced "Mythos" family, while Mythos 5 is a less-restricted version for approved cybersecurity and critical infrastructure partners. The government's directive was reportedly triggered by claims from another company that it could "jailbreak" Mythos 5, raising alarm within the Trump administration. Anthropic, in a detailed public statement, strongly challenged this rationale. The company argues the demonstrated "jailbreak" is a narrow, non-generalized technique that merely involves identifying minor, known software vulnerabilities—a capability common to other publicly available models like OpenAI's GPT-5.5 and routinely used by cybersecurity defenders. Anthropic stated it has complied with the order but disagrees with the government's standard, warning that applying it industry-wide would halt all new frontier model deployments. The company criticized the lack of a transparent, fact-based legal process and expressed confidence the situation stems from a misunderstanding. It is working to restore access and will release more technical details within 24 hours. Other Anthropic models remain unaffected.

链捕手15m ago

U.S. Government Bans Foreign Nationals from Using Fable 5, Anthropic Issues Rebuttal

链捕手15m ago

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

**Raydium Exploit Reveals DeFi's Hidden Risk: Forgotten "Zombie" Contracts** A recent attack on Raydium's deprecated V3 AMM pools resulted in a loss of approximately $1.34 million. The hacker exploited pools that were no longer supported by Raydium's current UI or SDK but remained fully functional and accessible on-chain. This incident highlights a critical, often overlooked category of risk in DeFi: inactive or legacy smart contracts that projects fail to properly decommission. Since March 2025, there have been at least 8 publicly reported attacks targeting such abandoned contracts, with total losses around $10.8 million. Including older pools and deprecated features, the count rises to 10 incidents with roughly $22.5 million in losses. These "zombie contracts" represent a lifecycle management failure rather than a code vulnerability, yet they are typically misclassified under general "code bug" categories in security reports, masking the true scale of the problem. The root cause is that projects often merely document a contract as "deprecated" without taking essential technical steps to secure it: withdrawing remaining assets, disabling external call functions, and implementing ongoing monitoring. These forgotten, under-monitored components become prime targets for attackers. To address this, the industry needs to recognize "zombie contracts" as a distinct risk category and establish standardized decommissioning protocols. Essential steps should include: 1) a formal retirement announcement, 2) removal of all front-end integrations, 3) withdrawal of locked assets, 4) disabling key contract functions, 5) ongoing security monitoring, 6) clear user communication, and 7) a post-mortem analysis. The value of a DeFi project lies not only in its current TVL but also in the security of its historical codebase, which has now become a new attack surface.

Foresight News2h ago

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

Foresight News2h ago

Robots Begin to 'Consume Data': The Hidden Production Chain from Indian Data Factories to Billion-Dollar Humanoid Robots

Robots have started to 'consume data,' driving the formation of a new industrial supply chain focused on producing training data for embodied AI. Unlike large language models, which are trained on vast internet text corpora, embodied AI models face a 'data desert' in the physical world. This has created a massive demand for first-person perspective video data (Ego Data), captured by workers wearing cameras in places like Indian garment factories. Companies like Neocambrian AI are establishing 'data factories' where workers perform standardized tasks (e.g., sorting clothes, kitchen organization) to generate thousands of hours of video. Research, such as NVIDIA's EgoScale, demonstrates that scaling this human demonstration data predictably improves robot performance, particularly for dexterous manipulation. This has validated a training path combining large-scale human data for pre-training with smaller amounts of robot-specific data for fine-tuning. The value of different data types varies significantly, forming a 'data pyramid.' The base consists of low-cost, large-scale internet and Ego Data. Higher layers include more expensive motion-capture data (e.g., from data gloves), simulation/synthetic data, and the most costly and scarce layer: real robot teleoperation data. This demand has spawned a layered ecosystem of data suppliers: low-cost data factories, motion capture and alignment specialists, robot-native teleoperation service providers, simulation data companies, and platforms aiming for data standardization. Robot companies themselves are adopting a 'layered procurement' strategy: outsourcing generic Ego Data while building in-house capabilities for robot-specific adaptation data and the critical deployment/failure data generated in real-world applications. The industry is shifting focus from hardware and basic mobility to the data pipelines required for general-purpose capability. While parallels exist to data labeling companies like Scale AI in the LLM boom, the physical complexity of robot data—involving action success ambiguity and sim-to-real gaps—requires more integrated solutions for data collection, annotation, and a continuous feedback loop. The race is on to build the data engines that will teach robots to operate reliably in the unstructured real world.

marsbit4h ago

Robots Begin to 'Consume Data': The Hidden Production Chain from Indian Data Factories to Billion-Dollar Humanoid Robots

marsbit4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片