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

Key Lawmaker 'Relents', Wash's Biggest Obstacle to Assuming Fed Chair on May 15 Cleared

Key political opposition to Kevin Warsh's nomination as Federal Reserve Chair has been removed after Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) withdrew his objection, clearing the way for a committee vote on April 29. Tillis had previously blocked the nomination due to a criminal investigation into current Chair Jerome Powell, which he viewed as a threat to Fed independence. The Justice Department has since dropped the investigation. Warsh, who has broad Republican support, is expected to be confirmed by the Senate in time for Powell’s term expiration on May 15. If confirmed, Warsh has signaled significant policy changes, including abolishing the "dot plot" of interest rate projections and reevaluating the Fed’s forward guidance framework. These changes could fundamentally alter the market’s pricing mechanisms for stocks, bonds, and currencies. Although the criminal case against Powell is closed, uncertainty remains as he retains his board seat until 2028. President Trump has not fully endorsed Powell, citing an ongoing review of Fed renovation spending. Warsh’s potential reforms target the communication tools developed post-2008, which have become foundational to global asset pricing.

marsbit13m ago

Key Lawmaker 'Relents', Wash's Biggest Obstacle to Assuming Fed Chair on May 15 Cleared

marsbit13m ago

Lowering Expectations for BTC's Next Bull Market

The author, Alex Xu, explains his decision to significantly reduce his Bitcoin holdings (from full to ~30% of his portfolio) during the current bull cycle, citing a lowered long-term outlook for BTC's price appreciation in the next cycle. He outlines six key reasons for this reduced expectation: 1. **Diminished Growth Drivers:** The narrative of exponential user adoption has largely played out with institutional ETF adoption. The next major growth phase—adoption by sovereign national reserves or central banks—seems unlikely in the near future. 2. **Personal Opportunity Cost:** More attractive investment opportunities have emerged in other assets, such as undervalued companies. 3. **Industry-Wide Contraction:** The broader crypto industry is struggling, with most Web3 business models (SocialFi, GameFi, DePIN) failing. This overall萧条 (depression) reduces the fundamental demand and consensus for Bitcoin. 4. **Strain on Major Buyer:** MicroStrategy, a major corporate buyer of BTC, faces rising financing expenses for its debt, which could slow its purchasing rate and create significant marginal pressure on the market. 5. **Increased Competition from Gold:** The emergence of "tokenized gold" has closed the functional gap (portability, divisibility) between physical gold and Bitcoin, offering a strong competitor in the non-sovereign store-of-value space. 6. **Security Budget Concerns:** The block reward halving continues to exacerbate the long-standing issue of funding Bitcoin's network security, with new fee source explorations like Ordinals and L2s largely failing. The author's decision to hold a significant (though reduced) position reflects a cautious, not bearish, outlook. He remains open to increasing his exposure if the fundamental reasons for his skepticism change or if new positive catalysts emerge.

marsbit27m ago

Lowering Expectations for BTC's Next Bull Market

marsbit27m ago

Prediction Markets Cannot Exist Without Insider Trading, But Insider Trading Is Killing Them

Prediction markets face a fundamental contradiction: they rely on insider trading to generate accurate prices, yet this same activity erodes public trust and threatens their survival. Recent scandals, such as a U.S. special forces member making $400,000 on Polymarket using classified information about a raid, highlight the severity of the issue. While platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi market themselves as venues where "everyone is an expert" and encourage informed trading, they also enforce policies against illegal insider trading. The core dilemma is that these markets depend on informed insiders for price efficiency but require uninformed retail participants to provide liquidity. If insider trading is too rampant, retail traders leave, perceiving the market as unfair. If restrictions are too strict, valuable information flow dries up, reducing the market’s predictive utility. The challenge is finding a balance that maintains both accuracy and perceived fairness—a task complicated by regulatory pressures and recurring scandals.

marsbit33m ago

Prediction Markets Cannot Exist Without Insider Trading, But Insider Trading Is Killing Them

marsbit33m ago

Can Iran 'Control' the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran has announced a comprehensive plan to assert control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil shipping chokepoint. The proposed measures include requiring all vessels to obtain Iranian permission for passage, imposing fees for security, environmental protection, and navigation management—preferably paid in Iranian rials—and absolutely banning Israeli ships. Vessels from countries deemed hostile by Iran’s top security bodies may also be barred. Analysts suggest Iran’s motives are multifaceted: increasing pressure on the U.S. and Israel by leveraging control over oil transit to influence global prices and inflation; creating a new revenue stream, potentially exceeding $7.7 billion annually, to counter Western sanctions and support postwar reconstruction; and using transit permissions as bargaining chips in future negotiations, notably with the U.S. However, the plan faces significant practical and diplomatic challenges. Enforcing comprehensive interception and fee collection in the busy waterway, patrolled by international military forces, would be difficult. The U.S. has already countering with a blockade of Iranian ports and threats to intercept any ship paying fees, potentially strangling Iran’s oil exports and fee revenue. Broad international opposition, led by European and Gulf states, and legal controversies further complicate implementation. The proposal may ultimately serve more as a negotiating tactic than a feasible policy, with its execution remaining highly uncertain.

marsbit1h ago

Can Iran 'Control' the Strait of Hormuz?

marsbit1h ago

Vertically Integrated Capital Aggregators: How Does Web3 Build an Impregnable Moat?

"Vertical Integration Capital Aggregators: How Web3 Builds Unbreachable Moats" explores how leading Web3 protocols create competitive advantages by vertically integrating multiple ecosystem components. Unlike Web2 aggregators that focus on user demand or supplier commoditization, successful Web3 entities like Hyperliquid aggregate capital, liquidity, users, and distribution into a unified financial ecosystem. This integration allows for efficient capital deployment—Hyperliquid generates $0.30 in fees per $1 of TVL annually, compared to Aave's $0.05—while creating a defensible moat that is difficult to replicate across six simultaneous fronts. However, this model comes with risks: DeFi loses $0.50 to hacks for every $1 earned, pushing protocols toward partial centralization and closed systems for security and scalability. The token serves as a shared incentive layer, aligning stakeholders and driving value through mechanisms like buybacks. The article concludes that vertical integration, not capital itself, is the true moat, and that the industry is evolving toward pragmatic, partially centralized models to ensure economic growth and sustainability.

marsbit1h ago

Vertically Integrated Capital Aggregators: How Does Web3 Build an Impregnable Moat?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片