Experts point to ‘whether Wemix distribution volume is falsely disclosed’ as the most important issue in the provisional injunction for suspension of delisting of Wemix.
Cho Won-hee (52, Judicial Research and Training Institute, 30th class) Representative Attorney at Law Firm D’Lightsaid, “The real issue is whether or not this is a serious issue enough to delist, even if there has been some misstatement of the information about the issuance and distribution of coins (or tokens).” “Compared to securities, the amount of issuance and circulation of securities is really strictly managed, but in the case of tokens, since the distribution and issuance are entrusted to the company itself, there are aspects that are not as strictly managed as in securities.” In this unclear state, it is important to see whether some information is incorrect and can go all the way to delisting.”
Attorney Cho said, “In the end, the most important issue is whether tokens and securities are judged to be virtually similar from the viewpoint of investor protection, and what kind of character the court will define virtual assets.” “If coins are traded with limited information through a market called a virtual asset exchange, as seen by the government or the Financial Supervisory Service, then from an investor protection point of view, they will eventually see that they should be regulated similarly to securities,” he said. “The proposition of investor protection Yes, of course it is necessary, but in the meantime, coins have been treated differently from securities, and because they are different in terms of laws and actual regulations, if you see that they cannot be regarded as securities, the criteria for judgment will be a little more flexible.”
Regarding the impact this case will have on the virtual asset market, he said, “The overall policy stance on virtual currency is in fact focusing on investor protection, but there are also voices of concern about whether it is right to focus only on investor protection.” Since the case will make an important judgment on how the court will view the standards or perspectives of investor protection for tokens, it will also have an impact on the government’s policy.”
Meanwhile Seo Gi-won (54th, 30th class) Attorney at Dongin Law Firmanalyzed, “If the court accepts the provisional injunction, the transaction will continue normally, but (the court) will consider how the transaction will continue and how it will affect investors and damage can occur.” “The exchange side insists that it is for investor protection, and Wemics is likely to argue that the delisting itself can harm good investors, so the court will consider ‘a situation in which shrimp will not explode in a whale fight.’”
Lee In-hwan (40, bar exam 3 times) Attorney at law firm Jeha“In cases of injunctive relief, there is a tendency to judge in the way of preventing the occurrence of irreversible situations, and the delisting of Wemix is an irreversible decision in light of the nature of cryptocurrency.” While it occurs immediately, it is also possible to prevent damage from new investors while listed, so there is a possibility that Wemix’s application will be cited.”
Reporters Lee Yong-kyung and Han Su-hyun yklee shhan@