.jpg?fit=%2C&ssl=1)
Experts point to “whether Wemix’s distribution volume is falsely disclosed” as the most important issue in the interim injunction to suspend Wemix’s delisting.
Cho Won-hee (52, Judicial Research and Training Institute, 30th Class) Representative Attorney at D’Light Law Firmhe said: “The real issue is whether or not this is a serious enough issue to be removed from the list, even though there have been some errors in 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 is entrusted to the company itself, there are aspects that are not managed so strictly as in the titles. “In this unclear state, it is important to see if some information is incorrect and can go as far as delisting.”
Attorney Cho said, “In the end, the more important question is whether tokens and securities are judged to be virtually similar from an investor protection perspective and what kind of character the court will define virtual assets.” “If coins are traded with limited information through a market called virtual asset trading, as viewed by the government or the Financial Supervision Service, then from an investor protection perspective, they will eventually see that they should be regulated similarly to securities, – he said – The investor protection proposal 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 current laws and regulations, if you see that they cannot be considered titles, the judging criteria will be a little more flexible”.
Regarding the impact this case will have on the virtual asset market, he said, “The general policy stance on virtual currency is indeed focusing on investor protection, but there are also concerned voices that it is right to focus only on on investor protection “Because the case will make an important judgment about how the court will consider investor protection standards or prospects for tokens, it will also impact government policy.”
Meanwhile Seo Gi-won (Class of 54, 30) Lawyer at Dongin Law Firmanalyzed, “If the court accepts the interim injunction, the transaction will continue as normal, but (the court) will consider how the transaction will continue and how it will affect investors and harm may occur.” “The exchange’s side insists it’s for investor protection, and Wemics is likely to argue that the delisting itself can harm good investors, so the court will consider ‘a situation where Shrimp won’t explode in a fight of whales'”.
Lee In-hwan (40 years old, bar exam 3 times) Attorney at Jeha Law Firm“Injunctive relief cases tend to be judged in a way that prevents irreversible situations from occurring, and the delisting of Wemix is an irreversible decision in light of the nature of the cryptocurrency.” it’s also possible to prevent harm from new investors while they’re listed, so there’s a chance that Wemix’s application will be quoted.
Reporters Lee Yong-kyung and Han Su-hyun yklee shhan@
