Korean MP Accused of Pressuring Upbit After Securing Bithumb Internship for Son
A senior South Korean ruling-party lawmaker, Kim Byung-kee, is accused of targeting Upbit — the country’s largest crypto exchange — in the National Assembly after arranging an internship and later a hire for his son at rival exchange Bithumb. Reports say Kim sought briefing materials in February to challenge Dunamu (Upbit’s operator), alleging monopoly concerns and about 700,000 KYC violations. Earlier reporting adds Kim met privately with Bithumb in November 2024 before his son joined Bithumb’s data team. Upbit held roughly 72% of the South Korean crypto market in H1 2025. Kim denies naming any company or linking his parliamentary actions to his son’s hiring. The case has prompted calls for his resignation from opposition parties and factions within the ruling coalition, raising regulatory and reputational risks for major Korean exchanges and increasing the likelihood of government scrutiny into market concentration and compliance practices. For traders: the story elevates political and regulatory risk around dominant domestic exchanges (Upbit and Bithumb), could spur investigative or legislative actions, and may increase volatility in Korean-listed or Korea-exposed crypto firms and market share-sensitive tokens.
Bearish
The news increases regulatory and reputational risk focused on Upbit and, by extension, other major Korean exchanges. For the short term, trader reactions may include heightened volatility and risk-off flows in Korea-exposed crypto equities, exchange tokens (if any), and listed firms with ties to Dunamu or Bithumb as markets reprice potential investigations or legislative action. Allegations of political interference and KYC failures can prompt immediate liquidity shifts, sell-side pressure, and widening spreads. Over the medium to long term, sustained regulatory scrutiny could reduce market concentration (through fines, forced changes, or tighter rules) or prompt structural shifts in market share; both outcomes create uncertainty that typically weighs on investor appetite for assets closely tied to implicated platforms. No direct technological or product-development positives are signaled, so impact is primarily negative until clarity or exoneration reduces perceived risk.