As major banks such as KB, Hana, and Woori Bank decided not to enter into a real-name account issuance alliance with cryptocurrency exchanges, cryptocurrency exchanges fell on fire. It was found that some small and medium-sized cryptocurrency exchanges, which became urgent, were even targeting savings banks rather than financial institutions subject to real-name authentication.
According to the IT industry and the financial sector on the 25th, a number of small and medium-sized cryptocurrency exchanges recently sought out real-name authentication alliance cooperation with savings banks equipped with a relatively well-equipped digital banking system. The cryptocurrency exchange first sought to link the account with the person in charge of savings bank affiliates, but all the savings banks who received their intentions refused.
A savings bank official said, “I have been contacted by multiple cryptocurrency exchanges, but there are not many reasons to do so”. “It is difficult to expect a synergy between the cryptocurrency sector and the savings bank sector that we have not even reviewed, and the perception of savings banks is good.” “It is because we judged that only negative images can be enlarged if we make a mistake in a bad situation.”
He added, “It seemed to be asking for a savings bank equipped with a relatively digital infrastructure (infrastructure), but in fact, savings banks are not a financial company that can provide real-name authentication even if they want to hold hands.” It would be difficult to form a business alliance with those who approached it.”
In fact, when I checked the enforcement decree of the Specific Financial Transactions Act (Special Act), it was found that savings banks were excluded from the’financial companies’ included in the scope of virtual asset transactions. An official from the financial authorities also said, “Savings banks are not allowed to (provide real-name account authentication to cryptocurrency exchanges).”
The fact that cryptocurrency exchanges have tried to cooperate with savings banks even though it is impossible to link with real-name account authentication itself is proof that the situation is urgent. This is because, under the Special Money Act, cryptocurrency-related businesses can operate only by receiving a deposit and withdrawal account that can confirm the customer’s real name from the bank by September 24, when the grace period ends, and reporting it to the Financial Information Analysis Agency (FIU).
Currently, the only exchanges that have received real name authentication for accounts are Kobit (Shinhan Bank), Bithumb (Nonghyup Bank), Coinone (Nonghyup Bank), and Upbit (Kbank). In the case of Gopax, it is known that they have discussed real-name account alliances with Busan Bank, and it is reported that Hanbitco and G-Dak have also held discussions with banks. Exchanges other than these are in the process of closing their business as they are also discussing partnerships. As new alliances are not easy, there is growing concern that investors may suffer damage due to a bunch of business closures.
Excluding Shinhan Bank, NH Nonghyup Bank, and K-Bank, which have already entered into a real-name account authentication partnership, major banks have decided not to take their hands because the risk of legal liability due to money laundering and hacking is greater than the effect of gaining commission and securing an account. According to the guidelines of the Federation of Banks, there is widespread concern that banks may overturn all responsibilities because banks have to’verify’ in order for banks to form an alliance with cryptocurrency exchanges in the future. In addition, it is a burdensome situation to enter into an additional alliance with the situation that Eun Seong-soo, chairman of the finance committee, revealed negative perceptions about cryptocurrency at the National Assembly last month.
An official from a financial company said, “Even the Agricultural Cooperatives, which are known to have been reviewing alliances most actively, are in a difficult situation.”