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

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-04-13Actualizado a 2026-04-13

Resumen

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

Preguntas relacionadas

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.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Circle CEO's Seoul Visit: No Korean Won Stablecoin Issuance, But Met All Major Korean Banks

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire's recent activities in Seoul indicate a strategic shift for the company, moving away from issuing a Korean won-backed stablecoin and instead focusing on embedding itself as a key infrastructure provider within Korea’s financial and crypto ecosystem. Despite Korea accounting for nearly 30% of global crypto trading volume—with a market characterized by high retail participation and altcoin dominance—Circle has chosen not to compete for the role of stablecoin issuer. Instead, Allaire met with major Korean banks (including Shinhan, KB, and Woori), financial groups, leading exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone), and tech firms like Kakao. This approach reflects a broader industry transition: the core of stablecoin competition is shifting from issuance rights to systemic positioning. With Korean regulators still debating whether banks or tech companies should issue stablecoins, Circle is avoiding regulatory uncertainty by strengthening its role as a service and technology partner. The company is deepening integration with trading platforms, building connections, and promoting stablecoin infrastructure. This positions Circle to benefit regardless of which entity eventually issues a won stablecoin. Allaire also noted the potential for a Chinese yuan stablecoin in the next 3–5 years, underscoring a regional trend of stablecoins becoming more regulated and integrated with traditional finance. Ultimately, Circle’s strategy highlights that future influence in the stablecoin market will belong not necessarily to the issuers, but to the foundational infrastructure layers that enable cross-system transactions.

marsbitHace 4 min(s)

Circle CEO's Seoul Visit: No Korean Won Stablecoin Issuance, But Met All Major Korean Banks

marsbitHace 4 min(s)

SpaceX Ties Up with Cursor: A High-Stakes AI Gambit of 'Lock First, Acquire Later'

SpaceX has secured an option to acquire AI programming company Cursor for $60 billion, with an alternative clause requiring a $10 billion collaboration fee if the acquisition does not proceed. This structure is not merely a potential acquisition but a strategic move to control core access points in the AI era. The deal is designed as a flexible, dual-path arrangement, allowing SpaceX to either fully acquire Cursor or maintain a binding partnership through high-cost collaboration. This "option-style" approach minimizes immediate regulatory and integration risks while ensuring long-term alignment between the two companies. At its core, the transaction exchanges critical AI-era resources: SpaceX provides its Colossus supercomputing cluster—one of the world’s most powerful AI training infrastructures—while Cursor contributes its AI-native developer environment and strong product adoption. This synergy connects compute power, models, and application layers, forming a closed-loop AI capability stack. Cursor, founded in 2022, has achieved rapid growth with over $1 billion in annual revenue and widespread enterprise adoption. Its value lies in transforming software development through AI agents capable of coding, debugging, and system design—positioning it as a gateway to future software production. For SpaceX, this move is part of a broader strategy to evolve from a aerospace company into an AI infrastructure empire, integrating xAI, supercomputing, and chip manufacturing. Controlling Cursor fills a gap in its developer tooling layer, strengthening its AI narrative ahead of a potential IPO. The deal reflects a shift in AI competition from model superiority to ecosystem and entry-point control. With programming tools as a key battleground, securing developer loyalty becomes crucial for dominating the software production landscape. Risks include questions around Cursor’s valuation, technical integration challenges, and potential regulatory scrutiny. Nevertheless, the deal underscores a strategic bet: controlling both compute and software development access may redefine power dynamics in the AI-driven future.

marsbitHace 45 min(s)

SpaceX Ties Up with Cursor: A High-Stakes AI Gambit of 'Lock First, Acquire Later'

marsbitHace 45 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片