Korea’s next digital asset law should give firms a predictable path to build and compete. As Daniel Castro and Sejin Kim argue in The Korea Times, the National Assembly should pass a coherent market framework promptly while requiring restrictions on entry and competition to demonstrate measurable public benefits.
The authors call for a common legal framework covering asset classification, activity-based licensing, custody, disclosure, and market conduct. Clear rules would help Korean firms develop custody, payments, and tokenization services at home. Contested structural restrictions could be subject to pilot periods, mandatory reviews, or sunset provisions so unresolved disputes do not delay certainty across the sector.
Proposals to require bank majority ownership of won stablecoin issuers or disperse crypto exchange ownership warrant closer scrutiny. Stablecoin rules should set demanding, technology-neutral standards for reserves, redemption, audits, cybersecurity, and operational continuity, allowing banks and qualified technology companies to compete. Exchange rules should directly address customer-asset protection and other risks before imposing ownership caps that could deter investment.
The U.S. Senate’s failure to advance the CLARITY Act offers Korea a warning: Disputes over individual restrictions can derail a necessary market framework. The National Assembly should give firms room to build while requiring permanent restrictions to prove their value. Read the full commentary in The Korea Times.
