South Korea Draft Weighs Bank-Led Won Stablecoin Issuance

By Tom Whitfield

A draft of South Korea’s planned digital asset law could establish a bank-led consortium to issue won-pegged stablecoins, according to the current draft summary. The text is expected this month; under the proposal, banks would lead issuance while exchanges and third-party payment platforms compete for consumer and merchant circulation.

What would the draft authorize?

The draft may assign exchanges and third-party payment platforms roles in moving stablecoins between consumers and merchants. That creates two competitive layers: organizations coordinating the issuance of won-pegged tokens, and operators seeking wider use at the point of payment.

The summary uses the term “bank-led consortium” and describes a possible “Dunamu-Naver Financial integration.” Neither phrase represents a completed arrangement. Both describe options that depend on the draft’s final terms and permissions.

That structure is closer to a wholesale supplier and a retail distributor than to one institution controlling the entire flow. Issuance would sit with banks, while circulation would sit with exchanges and payment platforms.

Who could capture circulation?

Dunamu, which operates Upbit, and Naver Financial could become potential access points if their services are permitted to connect with the proposed stablecoin framework. The current summary identifies them as possible factors in the contest, not confirmed partners.

For Dunamu, the stated revenue route is stablecoin trading. If its services can connect with the proposed framework, Dunamu could earn revenue when users trade the stablecoins through Upbit. The summary does not describe any active integration at this stage.

For Naver Financial, the stated revenue route lies in merchant payments and settlement. The company could collect fees associated with merchant payments and settlement involving won-pegged stablecoins. Its role, as described, sits downstream from issuance rather than inside the bank consortium.

What changes for banks and merchants?

The draft would separate control of token issuance from control of circulation. Banks would coordinate issuance through the proposed consortium; exchanges and payment platforms would compete for customer access, transaction flow and merchant acceptance.

That separation could make distribution as important as issuance. A bank could help issue won-pegged tokens without owning the exchange or payment interface through which consumers and merchants use them. Conversely, a payment platform could connect those users without joining the issuing consortium.

The commercial contest would therefore extend beyond the issuance role itself. Exchanges could seek trading revenue, while payment platforms could seek merchant fees and settlement income. The draft summary does not state how those economics would be allocated or whether participants would share revenue.

What remains unspecified?

The current summary names no participating banks, responsible regulator, blockchain or token standard. It also leaves the consortium’s operating rules and the allocation of fees unsettled.

Those omissions matter because each term could change which firms gain an operational advantage. The draft supports a broad division of roles, but not a final allocation of authority or revenue.

Publication this month is the only stated deadline. Until the draft is public, the proposal remains conditional, including the bank-led issuance structure and the potential participation of Dunamu, Upbit and Naver Financial.

What is the next milestone?

The next milestone is the draft’s release this month. Its text will show whether the bank-led structure remains central, whether exchanges and payment platforms receive defined circulation roles, and what permission would be required for Upbit and Naver Financial to connect.