South Korea May Freeze Crypto Accounts Before Gains Are Cashed Out in Major Crackdown

South Korean financial authorities are weighing a new enforcement tool that would allow them to freeze crypto-related accounts before suspected gains are cashed out.

The proposal, described as a “payment freeze” system, is intended to stop suspects from withdrawing, transferring, or otherwise concealing profits while investigations are still underway.

Officials Warn Crypto Profits Are Escaping Reach Under Current Rules

Local outlet Newsis reported that the Financial Services Commission discussed the idea during a closed-door meeting in November while reviewing a virtual asset price manipulation case.

Regulators concluded that the current legal framework leaves a critical gap. Under existing rules, authorities must first secure a court warrant during a prosecution phase to seize or preserve assets, a process that can take time.

In fast-moving crypto markets, that delay often gives suspects the opportunity to move funds into personal wallets or overseas platforms, effectively putting them out of reach.

Officials familiar with the discussions said investigators are increasingly encountering manipulation schemes that generate large unrealized profits.

These include front-running, automated wash trading, repeated high-priced buy orders, and coordinated profit-taking. While some gains remain on exchanges as unsold assets, others can be quickly withdrawn once prices peak.

Regulators argue that being able to freeze accounts at an earlier stage would prevent suspects from monetizing those gains or hiding them before charges are formally filed.

The proposed mechanism would mirror a system already used in the stock market. Amendments to the Capital Markets Act that took effect in April 2025 introduced the ability to suspend payments on accounts suspected of unfair trading or illegal short selling.

That authority was first exercised in September in a high-profile case involving a 100 billion won stock manipulation scheme.

At the time, regulators froze 75 accounts linked to a group of wealthy investors and financial professionals, preventing the withdrawal of both realized and unrealized profits.

Authorities later said the suspects had generated roughly 40 billion won in gains, half of which had not yet been sold.

During the November meeting, FSC members pointed to that case as evidence the approach could work in crypto markets.

Several participants reportedly agreed that a similar tool should be considered under the second phase of South Korea’s virtual asset legislation.

One official noted that virtual assets are even easier to conceal than stocks once they leave regulated platforms, making early intervention more critical.

Crypto Oversight in South Korea Enters a More Aggressive Phase

South Korea’s first phase of crypto legislation, the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, took effect in July 2024 and focused primarily on investor protection and prohibiting unfair trading.

While it strengthened the obligations of exchanges to monitor and report suspicious activity, it did not grant authorities broad powers to preemptively freeze assets.

The second phase, which is yet to be formally introduced, is expected to address stablecoins, market abuse, and enforcement gaps highlighted by recent cases.

The push for stronger tools comes as regulators ramp up oversight across both traditional and digital markets.

In July 2025, South Korea established a Joint Response Unit involving the Financial Supervisory Service and the Korea Exchange to speed up investigations into major manipulation cases.

Surveillance systems have also been upgraded with artificial intelligence to better detect repeat offenders and media-driven price manipulation.

The broader crackdown extends beyond trading abuses. In December, regulators began reviewing proposals that would hold major crypto exchanges to bank-level liability standards following a $30 million hack at Upbit.

Officials say these measures reflect a shift toward treating digital assets with the same regulatory seriousness as traditional financial products.