South Korea’s saga continues, authorities in the country have had a recent string of assaults on players in the crypto space. Some of these can be stated as justified, some not so much. The justified ones range from the South Korean government taking a closer inspection of exchanges to make sure that they comply with security and other elements. These inspections are in response to different hacks that have been perpetrated by their neighbor to the north and others. These hacks have left many with a loss and so to stem and prevent further loss, the different branches of the government have been more cautious and rigorous.

It does seem that their government seems to be going overboard with the different rumors of them banning cryptocurrency exchanges and the market in general.  Further adding to concerns have been South Korea and their reach out to China and others to work together on regulation. Turning to China caused great concern due to how China has treated the ecosystem on its land.

The South Korean government has backed up and has held its stance as it has received significant backlash from the people. The government has even gone on to receive various petitions, some calling for the removal of several of the key people who were involved in the debacle and placing these events hostile events in motion. The regulatory situation is still somewhat in limbo, but the scrutiny on the market continues.

The Government on Anonymity

The Financial Regulatory Department has recently stated that investors in the cryptocurrency domain must not trade or invest in an anonymous manner. Those that do will run into penalties. Ultimately, the government is saying that these investors must have their identity affixed to the virtual account that they wish to trade with…or else.

These authorities provided these anonymous investors with a short time frame to convert from an opaque way of trading to a transparent way. They will have until the end of January.

If this demand is not met, then these traders will receive a hefty fine. The price that these traders will have to pay for anonymity is still not yet revealed.

This raises a question, how does one fine an anonymous individual? One can shut down the account, but if anonymity is fully present, how would it be possible to trace who to fine?

These recent events seem to be a part of the government and their plan to bring the market to a cool down phase. The removal of anonymous accounts would guarantee that those who trade or invest are above the age limit and meet other present criteria as well.