{"id":2791,"date":"2026-05-01T22:26:15","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T22:26:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/?p=2791"},"modified":"2026-05-01T22:26:15","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T22:26:15","slug":"bithumb-secures-temporary-relief-as-court-suspends-six-month-ban","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/2026\/05\/01\/bithumb-secures-temporary-relief-as-court-suspends-six-month-ban\/","title":{"rendered":"Bithumb Secures Temporary Relief as Court Suspends Six Month Ban"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Bithumb has obtained short term relief after a court intervened to stop sanctions tied to compliance shortcomings. A court in South Korea has temporarily blocked the six month partial business suspension imposed on the crypto exchange, giving the company room to contest the regulatory decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Second Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court, under Judge Gong Hyeon jin, granted Bithumb\u2019s request to pause enforcement on the same day it was submitted. This decision effectively delays the sanction until the court delivers a final ruling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pause on Regulatory Action<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The suspension had originally been issued in March by the Financial Intelligence Unit, which also imposed a fine of 36.8 billion won equivalent to 24.6 million dollars. It remains uncertain whether the financial penalty is included in the suspension.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Authorities accused Bithumb of carrying out about 6.65 million breaches of South Korea\u2019s financial laws, particularly under the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information. The violations involved repeated failures in verifying customer identities and shortcomings in preventing restricted transactions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to penalties against the company, regulators issued a warning to Bithumb\u2019s chief executive and imposed a six month suspension on its reporting officer. These issues emerged during inspections of the country\u2019s five leading crypto exchanges including Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit and Gopax conducted between 2024 and 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The disciplinary action would have prevented new users from depositing or withdrawing digital assets. Implementation had already been postponed after Bithumb filed an administrative lawsuit along with a request to halt enforcement shortly before the penalty was set to begin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Promotion Error Sparks Additional Legal Trouble<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a separate issue, Bithumb is dealing with another legal challenge connected to a payout mistake earlier in the year. In April, the exchange requested a court order to freeze 7 Bitcoin that had not been returned after it accidentally distributed Bitcoin instead of Korean won during a February promotion. The error occurred when Bithumb intended to send a total of 620,000 won to 249 users but mistakenly processed the payments in Bitcoin, briefly resulting in unusually large transfers before they were reversed within minutes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most of the funds were later recovered after the exchange contacted recipients. However, a small number of users refused to return the remaining assets, prompting Bithumb to seek a provisional seizure. This legal step allows assets to be temporarily locked ahead of a formal civil case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some recipients have argued they are not required to return the funds because the mistake originated from the exchange. Legal experts cited in local reports disagree, stating that the situation qualifies as unjust enrichment, meaning individuals who received the funds in error are obligated to return them.#crypto#cryptonews https:\/\/coinsignals.net<\/a> https:\/\/t.me\/coinsignalpublic<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bithumb has obtained short term relief after a court intervened to stop sanctions tied to compliance shortcomings. A court in South Korea has temporarily blocked the...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2791"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2791\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2793,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2791\/revisions\/2793"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}