South Korea Urges Crypto Circuit Breakers After $42B Bithumb Mishap

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-04-13Last updated on 2026-04-13

Abstract

South Korea's central bank has recommended implementing cryptocurrency exchange "circuit breakers" following a major incident on Bithumb. In February, the exchange erroneously distributed 620,000 Bitcoin (worth approximately $42 billion) to customers instead of the intended 620,000 Korean won (about $400). This triggered panic selling, causing Bitcoin's price on the platform to plummet. Although Bithumb quickly halted trading and reversed the transactions, nearly $125 million in Bitcoin had already been sold. The Bank of Korea's report emphasizes that the crypto sector lacks the stringent internal controls of traditional finance and calls for mandatory systems to detect and prevent such human errors and discrepancies in asset records. This proposal is part of broader legislative moves in South Korea to enhance the security and transparency of virtual asset exchanges.

To avoid a recurrence of the market chaos that ensued in February when Bithumb accidentally delivered over $40 billion worth of Bitcoin to its clients, the South Korean central bank has suggested that cryptocurrency exchanges have “circuit breakers” that temporarily suspend trade.

In a payments report released on Monday, the Bank of Korea suggested that legislators think about implementing measures to halt trading in cryptocurrency in the event of unexpected price fluctuations, much as the trading limitations implemented by the Korea Exchange.

Stringent Protocols

According to the bank, the virtual asset sector is currently not well-regulated and does not have the same internal control procedures as more traditional financial institutions. Therefore, the research concluded, stronger applicable policies are required to proactively avoid such instances, as they may happen at other virtual asset exchanges.

This comes at a time when politicians in South Korea are trying to enact legislation that would further regulate cryptocurrency. The Bank of Korea has said that these regulations should include its recommendations to make virtual asset exchange activities more secure and transparent.

Rather than 620,000 Korean won, which was about $400, Bithumb mistakenly transferred 620,000 Bitcoin, which was valued around $42 billion at the time, to clients in early February. According to the bank’s assessment, the price of Bitcoin on Bithumb dropped as consumers hurried to sell, which in turn caused others to panic-sell, further lowering its price.

Within minutes, Bithumb stopped trading and reversed their Bitcoin transfers. However, the exchange clarified that 1,788 BTC, or almost $125 million, had already been sold before it could take any action, and it made up the difference using corporate reserves.

Crypto exchanges should be obligated to have systems that can identify and prevent human error-induced incorrect payments, according to the Bank of Korea. It went on to say that exchanges should also be able to detect and report differences between a platform’s internal assets and those on the blockchain.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Bitwise Accelerates Hyperliquid ETF Debut with Revised Filing

TagsAltcoinBitcoinBlockchain

Related Questions

QWhat did the Bank of Korea propose to prevent a recurrence of the Bithumb mishap?

AThe Bank of Korea proposed that cryptocurrency exchanges implement 'circuit breakers' to temporarily suspend trade in the event of unexpected price fluctuations.

QWhat was the nature of the error that Bithumb made in February?

ABithumb accidentally transferred 620,000 Bitcoin, valued at approximately $42 billion, to its clients instead of 620,000 Korean won (about $400).

QWhat was the market impact of Bithumb's erroneous transfer?

AThe price of Bitcoin on Bithumb dropped as customers hurried to sell the mistakenly received funds, which triggered panic-selling and further drove down the price.

QAccording to the Bank of Korea, why is the virtual asset sector particularly vulnerable to such incidents?

AThe Bank of Korea stated that the virtual asset sector is not well-regulated and lacks the same internal control procedures as traditional financial institutions.

QWhat specific systems did the Bank of Korea suggest exchanges be obligated to have?

AThe Bank of Korea suggested exchanges should have systems to identify and prevent human error-induced incorrect payments, and to detect and report differences between a platform's internal assets and those on the blockchain.

Related Reads

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit54m ago

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit54m ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit1h ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit1h ago

Zcash Bug Could Have Minted Unlimited ZEC Undetected

A critical vulnerability in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, discovered by researcher Taylor Hornby on May 29, 2026, could have allowed an attacker to create an unlimited amount of undetectable counterfeit ZEC. The flaw, involving an under-constrained element in the Orchard circuit, existed from the pool's 2022 activation until an emergency fix was deployed by June 2, 2026. Hornby identified the bug using AI-assisted auditing tools and confirmed its exploitability in a test environment. Due to Orchard's privacy features, which hide transaction amounts and history, there is no cryptographic way to prove whether the vulnerability was exploited before the fix. While Shielded Labs assesses prior exploitation as unlikely, this uncertainty has sparked a debate on proving supply integrity in privacy-preserving systems. In response, Shielded Labs and other developers are exploring a network upgrade, potentially involving a new shielded pool and formal verification of the circuit rules to prevent future vulnerabilities and allow verification of the ZEC supply's integrity. ZEC's price fell nearly 45% following the disclosure.

bitcoinist1h ago

Zcash Bug Could Have Minted Unlimited ZEC Undetected

bitcoinist1h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit2h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit2h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit2h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片