-
Media CoverageStocks Losing Momentum, but Coins on the Rise with 'Value-Up'?
The concept of 'value-up,' which boosts corporate value by expanding shareholder returns, has emerged in the virtual asset market. The protagonist is Uniswap, the leading decentralized exchange project. This is done by expanding a type of dividend. With this news, other coin projects with high potential for shareholder returns have gained attention, leading to a sharp rise in related coin prices, reminiscent of the 'low PBR (Price-to-Book Ratio) market' in the domestic stock market. (omitted) The proposal involves distributing Uniswap's profits to investors who have staked 'UNI,' which plays a similar role to shares in the stock market. In other words, it is akin to Uniswap, the exchange, distributing its earnings to shareholders. Legally, there is not expected to be a significant issue. This is because Uniswap did not conduct an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) and distributed UNI tokens for free. Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin, Attorney at Descent Law Firm, stated, "Although staking is not clearly regulated, and the SEC may raise concerns, based on past precedents, it seems unlikely that the SEC will raise an issue regarding the securities nature of Uniswap."
2024-02-26 Maeil Economy -
Media Coverage
Investors Deceived by 'Scam Coin' through Celebrity Endorsements in Promotions
"Scam Coin" has emerged as a major crime in the virtual asset industry, with suspicions that popular YouTuber Oking and former soccer player Lee Chun-soo are involved in fraudulent virtual asset schemes. A scam coin refers to a virtual asset created for fraudulent purposes. Last year, the prosecution directly mentioned "scam coins" in indictments, closely monitoring related crimes. The typical method of scam coin operations involves perpetrators running a compartmentalized organization, gaining victims' trust, inflating the coin's price, and then dumping their holdings at a high point. (omitted) There have also been cases where public officials were implicated, leading to formal complaints. The Chief of a local police department in Gyeonggi Province, known as Chief A, was reported to the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) after it was revealed that he met with Mr. Choi, the former CEO of W Coin. Choi is currently under investigation for another coin, G Coin, which is suspected to be a scam coin. Attorneys Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin and Pureun “Ian” Hong of Descent Law Firm, who filed the complaint, stated, "Despite investigating Mr. Choi, the CEO of a virtual asset company, in his jurisdiction, Chief A had personal dealings and took photographs with him. Even though he had personal involvement, he failed to report it to the National Police Agency or the Ministry of Interior and Safety, nor did he request to be recused." Chief A defended himself, saying, "I had no idea that Mr. A, who I knew as a friend's son, was involved in scam coin allegations."
2024-02-25 Financial News -
Media Coverage
Attorney Pureun “Ian” Hong Files Complaint Against Current Police Officer Who Met with 'Scam Coin' CEO Under Investigation
A high-ranking police officer who met with a CEO under investigation for suspected "scam coin" (cryptocurrency fraud) has been reported to the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO). Attorneys Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin and Pureun “Ian” Hong of Descent Law Firm filed a complaint on the 19th against Chief A of a local police department in Gyeonggi Province for violating the Public Official Conflict of Interest Prevention Act and neglect of duty. The two attorneys are representing victims who invested in cryptocurrency B-Coin. The complainants stated, "Chief A took personal interest in a case where his department was investigating Choi, the CEO of a cryptocurrency company, and took photographs with him." They added, "Despite having a personal relationship with the suspects, Chief A did not report it to the National Police Agency or the Ministry of Interior and Safety, nor did he request to be recused." They further explained, "Chief A invited Choi to his office, took photographs, and the suspects used these photos on social media (SNS) to further their fraud scheme." They concluded, "Chief A neglected his duties by forming personal relationships with suspects, forgetting his role in the investigation."
2024-02-19 News1 -
Media Coverage
'Terra-Luna Incident' Raises Attention on the Determination of Cryptocurrency as Securities
With the extradition of Han Chang-joon, former CEO of Chai Corporation, who is considered central to the 'Terra-Luna incident,' the prosecution’s investigation is expected to gain momentum. The industry is paying close attention to whether this will accelerate the determination of the securities nature of virtual assets. (omitted) The virtual asset industry is watching closely as the prosecution’s investigation picks up speed, speculating that the judgment on the securities nature of Terra and Luna may also progress. The prosecution has charged Shin and others with violations of the Capital Markets Act, classifying Terra and Luna as investment contract securities under the law, but the final judgment will be made by the court. Legal experts view the Terra-Luna trial as the starting point for determining the securities nature of virtual assets in Korea. The key issue is whether the promises made to investors regarding TerraUSD, an algorithmic stablecoin issued by Terraform Labs, and Luna Coin, used to maintain its value, constitute an investment contract. Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin, Managing partner at Decent Law Firm, specializing in virtual assets, said, “There is a high possibility that fraud charges under the Special Economic Crimes Act will be recognized. The issue lies in whether there was a violation of the Capital Markets Act,” adding, “Regardless of punishment, this could be the starting point for determining the securities nature of virtual assets.”
2024-02-06 etoday -
Media Coverage
Ban on Bitcoin Spot ETF Violates the Principle of Legalism in Regulation
It is important to point out that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)’s recent approval of Bitcoin spot ETPs (Exchange-Traded Products) submitted by 11 asset management companies on the 11th calls into question the Financial Services Commission (FSC)’s repeated stance against Bitcoin spot ETFs, which violates the principle of legalism in regulation, as stipulated in Article 4, Clause 1 of the Basic Administrative Regulations Act. (omitted) Attorney Pureun “Ian” Hong from Descent Law Firm also pointed out that ▶ there is no clear legal basis under the current Capital Markets Act to prohibit a Bitcoin spot ETF, ▶ the FSC is aware of this and, while claiming there is a potential violation of the Capital Markets Act, has not presented specific provisions, ▶ and that it is highly problematic that the FSC has banned Bitcoin ETF brokerage based on arbitrary judgments by an administrative body rather than legal grounds.
2024-01-23 NBN NEWS -
Media Coverage
Legal Experts Argue 'Bitcoin Spot ETF is Possible' Despite Opposition
The main reason the financial authorities have stated that a domestic Bitcoin spot exchange-traded fund (ETF) cannot be approved is due to a violation of the current 'Capital Markets Act.' The authorities argue that Bitcoin cannot be regarded as a type of underlying asset defined under the Capital Markets Act. However, the legal community offers a completely different interpretation, suggesting that it ultimately depends on the will of the financial authorities. (omitted) Article 4, Clause 10 of the current Capital Markets Act defines the types of underlying assets. These include: 1) financial investment products, 2) currency (including foreign currencies), 3) general goods, 4) credit risk, and 5) other risks belonging to natural, environmental, or economic phenomena that can be reasonably and properly assessed or priced using indicators, interest rates, or other methods. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) interprets this clause to mean that virtual assets are not included in the investment targets of collective investment vehicles such as ETFs. However, they distinguish Bitcoin futures ETFs, which are currently tradable, as tracking a derivative futures index and, therefore, differing in nature from a Bitcoin spot ETF that involves the actual purchase and holding of Bitcoin. However, the legal community focuses on Clause 10, Item 5 (assets that can be reasonably and properly evaluated or priced). Hyeonsu “Elliot” Jin, Managing partner at Decent Law Firm, explained, “Item 5 is a broad provision. Even if Bitcoin does not fall under financial investment products, currency, general goods, or credit risk, it is evident that Bitcoin can be classified as an economic risk that can be reasonably and properly priced, making it at least qualify as an underlying asset.” He further added, “The law only requires a simple condition: that the price of the underlying asset can be reasonably and properly calculated or evaluated.”
2024-01-23 Herald Economy