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

a16z: How Should Crypto Entrepreneurs Understand the CLARITY Act?

a16z: How Crypto Entrepreneurs Should Understand the CLARITY Act? The U.S. Senate Banking Committee's bipartisan vote to advance crypto market structure legislation, specifically the Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act, marks a historic moment for the industry. For a decade, a lack of clear U.S. regulation has stifled innovation, created consumer risks, and pushed development overseas. CLARITY aims to end this by establishing clear rules for blockchain networks and digital assets, similar to how the 1933 Securities Act shaped capital formation. The current regulatory patchwork has failed, causing legal confusion and enabling bad actors while hindering responsible builders. CLARITY provides a path forward by clarifying the regulatory roles of the SEC and CFTC, defining whether digital assets are securities or commodities, and establishing oversight for crypto exchanges and consumer protections. Crucially, CLARITY recognizes that blockchain networks are fundamentally different from traditional companies. Networks operate through shared rules and decentralized coordination, not centralized control. Applying corporate frameworks distorts them, leading to value extraction by intermediaries. Blockchain enables truly decentralized networks where value can be distributed to participants. CLARITY is designed to make this viable under U.S. law, allowing builders to operate transparently, raise capital domestically, and focus on long-term innovation without structural compromises due to regulatory ambiguity. The bill's progression follows earlier House efforts like FIT21 and the House CLARITY Act, which received strong bipartisan support. If passed, CLARITY could unlock significant innovation within the U.S., similar to the growth seen after the GENIUS Act for stablecoins, helping the U.S. lead in the digital economy while better combating fraud and abuse.

marsbit19m ago

a16z: How Should Crypto Entrepreneurs Understand the CLARITY Act?

marsbit19m ago

AI Benefits Senior Staff? 40% of CEOs Plan to Cut Junior Positions, Young People's Jobs Are More at Risk

The traditional assumption that senior employees are first in line during layoffs is being inverted in the AI era. A survey of 415 CEOs by Oliver Wyman and the NYSE reveals 43% plan to cut entry-level positions in the next 1-2 years to shift towards a mid-to-senior talent structure, a sharp rise from 17% last year. The logic is that AI excels at automating routine, cognitive tasks typically handled by junior staff (e.g., coding, data review), while the experience and judgment of senior employees remain harder to replicate. Research indicates this shift primarily manifests as a hiring freeze for junior roles rather than mass layoffs. Goldman Sachs estimates AI currently nets a loss of about 16,000 US jobs monthly, disproportionately impacting Generation Z concentrated in highly automatable white-collar roles. This raises long-term concerns about a broken talent pipeline, as companies risk having no future senior managers trained internally. Despite the dominant trend, a minority of successful AI adopters, like IBM and Salesforce, are expanding junior hiring, arguing these employees are adept at using and building AI tools. However, most companies are still in early AI deployment phases, with 67% in planning/pilot stages and many reporting returns below expectations. The overarching reality is a weakening of job security across all levels, as organizations reshape for an AI-augmented, leaner future.

marsbit1h ago

AI Benefits Senior Staff? 40% of CEOs Plan to Cut Junior Positions, Young People's Jobs Are More at Risk

marsbit1h ago

Why Zcash Is Back in the Game

The article, an update from ZODL founder Josh Swihart, outlines Zcash's evolution from a "privacy coin" into a broader financial privacy infrastructure. Its core mission is to build a parallel financial system free from mass surveillance, enabling users to privately hold and spend ZEC anywhere. The strategy emphasizes focus: building essential protocol and product (Zodl wallet) capabilities in-house, accelerating development by integrating with external products/chains (e.g., NEAR Intents for swaps), and rejecting non-essential "side quests." Recent progress includes the Zodl iOS 3.4.0 release, updates to Swift/Android SDKs, and testing of in-wallet Coinholder Polling for governance. The Zcash Core team is working on shortening block times, fixing shielding issues, and advancing the Zallet alpha wallet. Upcoming features for Zodl include automatic server switching and multi-currency conversion. The piece highlights a shift towards holistic user adoption, connecting financial privacy, wallet experience, cross-chain utility, and community governance. It concludes with updates on an upcoming ZODL Summit, new team hires, grant applications, and recent positive media coverage, asserting that focused execution is paving the road to a private financial future for billions.

marsbit1h ago

Why Zcash Is Back in the Game

marsbit1h ago

Physical AI is Hot, Some New Thoughts from Me

The term "Physical AI" is gaining significant traction, marking a shift from AI that processes information to AI that understands and interacts with the physical world. Unlike traditional AI confined to screens, Physical AI involves integrating intelligence into robotic bodies to perform tasks in environments governed by gravity, friction, and inertia. The concept, formally defined in a 2020 paper, focuses on creating embodied systems that can complete perception-to-action cycles. 2026 is identified as a pivotal "deployment year," where the focus moves from demonstrations to practical utility. Companies like China's Zhiyuan Robotics have transitioned to live, unscripted factory deployments and announced mass production targets. Internationally, Figure AI, after a major funding round, shifted to its own neural system, while NVIDIA partnered with major industrial robot firms to upgrade millions of existing units with AI capabilities. A key trend is the crossover from the automotive supply chain. Companies like Aptiv and Valeo are entering the Physical AI space, leveraging their expertise in sensors, control systems, and mass production from the autonomous vehicle sector. This "technology spillover" is accelerating development, as seen with Tesla's plans to repurpose automotive production lines for its Optimus robot. The technical breakthrough enabling this progress is the engineering maturity of "world models." Previously theoretical, these AI models can now simulate physical interactions and generate vast, realistic synthetic training data for robots. Innovations from NVIDIA's Cosmos, Ant's LingBot-World, and others have made this capability more accessible, drastically reducing the cost and time needed for real-world data collection. This is driving a fundamental architectural shift in robotics: from the traditional "sense-plan-act" model, reliant on pre-programmed rules, to a "sense-reason-act" paradigm where neural networks reason and make decisions. This change represents a new paradigm where machines understand the world's physics. The competition is intense, with the landscape still forming. While the direction is clear, success will depend not just on AI algorithms but on manufacturing scalability, supply chain resilience, and efficient data strategies, with infrastructure providers potentially capturing significant value in this new era.

marsbit1h ago

Physical AI is Hot, Some New Thoughts from Me

marsbit1h ago

The AI Mirror Behind DeepSeek's Financing: Alibaba to the Left, Tencent to the Right

The DeepSeek financing round exposed a strategic divergence in AI approaches between Alibaba and Tencent. When the AI startup sought external funding, Alibaba reportedly sought "ecosystem control," wanting to deeply integrate DeepSeek's technology into its own platforms like Taobao and Aliyun. Tencent, in contrast, offered a minority financial investment without demands for exclusivity or control over the startup's technical direction, aligning with its historical "open ecosystem" strategy. ByteDance, largely absent from these talks, pursues a third path: massive in-house investment in its own model, Doubao. These choices stem from corporate DNA: Alibaba's e-commerce and cloud heritage favors closed-loop control, while Tencent's social and investment background prefers open connection. Alibaba, with its mature in-house AI stack (Tongyi Qianwen, Pingtouge chips), could afford to walk away. Tencent's self-developed Hunyuan model, though catching up, allows it to engage externally from a position of greater flexibility. The article posits these strategies—Alibaba's "castle" of vertical integration, Tencent's "port" of open ecosystems, and ByteDance's aggressive C-end push—will lead to a sustained, multi-polar competitive landscape in China's AI sector, rather than a single winner-takes-all outcome.

marsbit1h ago

The AI Mirror Behind DeepSeek's Financing: Alibaba to the Left, Tencent to the Right

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片

Hot Categoriesright-arrow

Hot Tagsright-arrow