Debate on Dissolution of Financial Services Commission Amidst Virtual Asset Policy Drift [Crypto Briefing]

[Financial News] As the National Planning Committee effectively pushes for the 'dissolution of the Financial Services Commission', concerns about the drift of virtual asset policy are rising. If the policy and supervisory functions of the Financial Services Commission are divided into the Ministry of Strategy and Finance and the Financial Supervisory Service, respectively, there is a high possibility that the establishment of a virtual asset regulatory framework, along with the second phase legislation (Virtual Asset Basic Act), will be delayed. Experts have suggested that discussions should also include measures to grant supervisory authority according to the type of virtual asset, similar to the U.S. 'Clarity Act'. According to the National Assembly and industry on the 6th, the National Planning Committee is pushing for an organizational restructuring plan to integrate the supervisory function of the Financial Services Commission with the Financial Supervisory Service to establish the Financial Supervisory Commission. Amid heated debates surrounding the Financial Services Commission, Financial Supervisory Service, Bank of Korea, and academia, the virtual asset industry also faces complex calculations. Initially, the Financial Services Commission planned to complete the virtual asset regulatory framework through second-phase legislation and prepare plans for the introduction of spot ETFs for Bitcoin and other virtual assets and stablecoin regulations in the second half of this year, but the organization itself is on the verge of dissolution.
According to the current Virtual Asset User Protection Act, the Financial Supervisory Service inspects whether virtual asset businesses comply with user protection obligations, and the Financial Services Commission imposes sanctions such as corrective orders, business suspensions, and fines on virtual asset businesses that violate obligations based on inspection results. Although the Virtual Asset Committee under the Financial Services Commission advises on policies and systems related to the virtual asset market and businesses as a statutory advisory body, there is no industry law.
A virtual asset industry official lamented, "There was an expectation that a clear regulatory framework would be established through second-phase legislation to revitalize the market, but as discussions on the organizational restructuring of the Financial Services Commission and Financial Supervisory Service are prolonged, virtual asset policy has become even more uncertain."
Major financial advanced countries have already achieved the activation of spot ETFs and stablecoins for virtual assets, but domestically, even the existing policy roadmap is unclear. A large law firm official emphasized, "Virtual assets should not be fitted into the existing financial regulatory framework, but a regulatory system that matches the characteristics of virtual assets should be established, securing global consistency," adding, "Once the National Planning Committee's financial supervisory system reform is concretized, the role and authority of the virtual asset regulatory authority should also be quickly re-established."
In this regard, some in the industry have suggested the Clarity Act, which is being intensively discussed in the U.S. Congress, as a model case. This bill focuses on resolving regulatory uncertainty by clearly distinguishing the legal nature and supervisory authority of virtual assets. Virtual assets without securities characteristics are supervised by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and those meeting the investment contract requirements under securities law are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Hwang Hyun-il, a lawyer at Sejong Law Firm, stated, "The Clarity Act reduces institutional confusion caused by regulatory gaps or overlaps by clearly defining the legal definition of virtual assets and the jurisdiction of regulatory agencies," adding, "It allows virtual asset businesses in the U.S. to operate in a clearer and more flexible regulatory environment."


elikim@fnnews.com Kim Mi-hee Reporter