Recently, South Korea made a significant move in the cryptocurrency space. As soon as the new president Lee Jae-myung took office, he introduced a major policy called (Basic Law on Digital Assets). This is not just talk; the core objective is to make South Korea a global leader in crypto regulation.


Doesn't it sound impressive? Let's break down what is really going on.


South Korea: Creating stablecoins, hoarding Bitcoin, and even involving pension funds?

Lee Jae-myung's plan is very 'on point.' It's not just about regulation; he also wants to deeply integrate crypto with the national financial system. There are several key points:


Encourage the issuance and use of the Korean won stablecoin to prevent capital outflow.

Propose to let the national pension fund invest in Bitcoin and other crypto assets. Researching the establishment of a national-level Bitcoin reserve.

Amend anti-money laundering regulations to attract more foreign investors into the South Korean crypto market.

In simple terms: it's not just regulation, but also development; they want to incorporate the entire crypto ecosystem into the national financial landscape and make it a reality.


Now let's see how the U.S. is doing? The two approaches are completely different.

The U.S. is also working on its own stablecoin legislation, called the (GENIUS Act). The core of it is tiered regulation:

Major stablecoin issuers (over 10 billion USD) are under federal regulation;

Small companies are regulated by individual states;

Focus only on 'payment-type' stablecoins, while not regulating other asset-type tokens.

The U.S. has a relatively 'decentralized' regulatory approach, emphasizing compliance and user protection, for example:

Must disclose reserve information;

There are strict anti-fraud and KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements. So, between South Korea and the U.S., who has more potential 'influence' in the crypto world?

This time, South Korea's legislation can be said to be more 'comprehensive,' covering not only stablecoin regulation but also asset-backed tokens.


However, there are also issues, for example:


All regulatory authority is centralized in the Financial Services Commission, causing concerns for the South Korean central bank;

Consumer protection measures are relatively not detailed enough, lacking the strict KYC and anti-fraud provisions seen in U.S. legislation.


In other words, the ambitions of the South Korean legislation are greater, while the U.S. legislation is more 'conservative and detailed.'



Summary: South Korea wants to become the 'leader of the crypto world,' but the outcome will depend on who plays the game steadily.


South Korea is indeed moving faster and more proactively in crypto regulation and development. But whether it can ultimately succeed depends on several factors:

Will the stablecoin policy attract projects to land in South Korea? Can the national pension and Bitcoin reserves really be realized?

Can the consumer protection mechanisms fill the gaps?

Currently, South Korea appears to be a 'pioneer' charging ahead, but that also means greater risks. Meanwhile, the U.S., while slower, seeks progress through stability.



I am a senior crypto analyst, tracking global regulatory trends and market directions for a long time.

If you want to stay updated on the dynamics of the 'crypto national team' and seize hot opportunities in advance, follow me to see the trends and traps of the crypto world!