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

Bitcoin Falls To $61,300 As Mt. Gox Moves BTC, Raising Selloff Concerns

Bitcoin fell to around $61,300 as markets reacted to Mt. Gox moving funds, raising selloff concerns. The defunct exchange transferred 116.3 BTC (worth ~$8.16 million) directly to Bitstamp, following a larger earlier move of 10,422.65 BTC (~$739 million) to a new wallet. The trustee is working towards the final creditor repayment deadline of October 31, 2026. While most eligible creditors have been repaid, roughly 24,081 BTC (~$1.55 billion) remains under Mt. Gox control, and its on-chain movements are closely watched for potential market pressure. Bitcoin later recovered above $64,000.

bitcoinist41m ago

Bitcoin Falls To $61,300 As Mt. Gox Moves BTC, Raising Selloff Concerns

bitcoinist41m ago

The Allocation Value of Gold as 'Financial Insurance' Against US Debt Crisis and High Yields

This report analyzes gold's role as "financial insurance" amid high US bond yields and escalating debt concerns. Gold prices surged from ~$2,624 in early 2025 to a record high of $5,589 by January 2026, driven by five key factors: 1) Unsustainable US fiscal trajectory and debt exceeding $39 trillion, 2) Accelerating de-dollarization and central bank gold purchases (e.g., China added 8 tons in April 2026), 3) Geopolitical tensions and energy-driven inflation from the Iran conflict, 4) Record-high investment demand via ETFs, and 5) Policy uncertainty under the new Fed Chair. Gold's price is inversely related to real interest rates and the US dollar. Investors can gain exposure through physical gold, ETFs like GLD/IAU (low-cost), or mining ETFs like GDX (higher risk/return). Key risks include rising real rates, a stronger dollar, easing geopolitical tensions, and potential overvaluation after the sharp rally. The report recommends a 5-10% portfolio allocation for diversification, viewing gold as a hedge against fiscal instability and systemic risk rather than a growth investment.

marsbit43m ago

The Allocation Value of Gold as 'Financial Insurance' Against US Debt Crisis and High Yields

marsbit43m ago

"Unlimited Money Printing" Bug Lurked for Four Years, Privacy Coin ZEC Plummets 50% in One Day

A critical "unlimited, undetectable counterfeit" vulnerability existed for nearly four years in the Orchard privacy pool of Zcash (ZEC), a privacy-focused cryptocurrency. The bug, which could theoretically allow attackers to create unlimited fake ZEC, was disclosed by founder Zooko Wilcox on June 5th. While officially patched and deemed low-probability for exploitation, the news triggered a market panic. ZEC's price plummeted over 50% in a single day. The core crisis stems from the inability to prove whether any counterfeit ZEC was created during the vulnerability's active period, as Orchard's design inherently hides transaction details. This casts severe doubt on ZEC's total supply integrity. The sell-off accelerated after prominent investor and ZEC narrative supporter Arthur Hayes announced he had sold his entire position, citing the inability to cryptographically prove the impossibility of extra minting. Community trust eroded further upon learning the bug was discovered with AI-assisted auditing, raising questions about Zcash's development and security review processes. The incident has evolved from a price correction into a fundamental crisis of confidence regarding the network's core security promises.

Odaily星球日报56m ago

"Unlimited Money Printing" Bug Lurked for Four Years, Privacy Coin ZEC Plummets 50% in One Day

Odaily星球日报56m ago

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Bitcoin prices declined 13% this week, reversing the recent rebound and signaling a likely transition into the later stages of a bear market. Key on-chain metrics deteriorated, with the short-term holder cost basis falling below the Realized Price—a pattern last seen in early 2022, characteristic of bear market maturity. The rally to ~$82k proved to be a bear market bounce, as evidenced by the 90-day realized profit/loss ratio failing to sustain above the bullish threshold of 2. Daily realized losses surged to $1.35B, including significant selling from long-term holders who accumulated near cycle tops, indicating ongoing supply redistribution. Price was rejected almost precisely at the aggregate US spot ETF cost basis of ~$83k, turning that level into resistance and leaving the average ETF investor underwater again. Spot market selling pressure intensified, with the 7-day volume delta turning significantly negative to its weakest level since February. While a major long liquidation event cleared over $400M in leverage, spot demand has not yet stepped in to absorb the resulting supply. Options markets continue pricing in higher future volatility (elevated volatility risk premium) and maintain a skew toward put options, reflecting persistent demand for downside protection, though not yet panic. Overall, market structure remains fragile. Sustained recovery likely requires a reclaim of the ETF cost basis, a shift back to positive spot demand, and a slowdown in realized loss-taking. Until then, the market risks further downside or extended consolidation within the broader bear trend.

Foresight News1h ago

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Foresight News1h ago

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News1h ago

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片