가상화폐 헌법소원 변호사 정희찬 변호사

Lawyer Chung Hee-chan, "Lawyers for Constitutional Law,".

He has won 1 victory as a claimant. The controversy over cryptocurrency regulation is still hot. The bigger the fluctuation of the cryptocurrency, the more intense the controversy.


Lawyer Chung Hee-chan, a lawyer who raised a constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court, rebelled against the government's cryptocurrency real-name transaction policy. Unlike what he described as a lawyer who lost money on cryptocurrency investments, his money was only 3,000 won.


He submitted this constitutional amendment to the Constitutional Court for engineering analysis of the proprietary nature of the cryptographic property as it was referred to the trial trial.


- I believe that cryptocurrency is worth the investment enough to make a request for a constitutional appeal.


The government's perception that 4.5 million people investing in cryptocurrency and hundreds of millions of people around the world think of gambling is very wrong. Cryptocurrency is used as a means of exchanging real transactions before investment value. I immediately give legal advice to Latvian clients and receive a bitcoin in return. The process of remitting the currency locally is very complicated and I prefer bitcoin. Cryptocurrency settlement method is necessary in reality. However, the domestic legal system for cryptocurrency has not been completed, so it can not exchange money. This is because there is a possibility of violation of foreign exchange control laws. The government has no solution to this problem.


Although we are not increasing cryptocurrency investment through exchanges, we will raise them through exchanges if necessary. I have a greater need for goods than investment.


He argues that cryptocurrency has formed an investment market because of its exchange value. 

Did you invest -3000 won in crypto because of the request for judgment of the Constitution?


The constitutional amendment is a violation of the fundamental rights of the people in the exercise of national power. There must be 'self-relevance' of infringement of fundamental rights, and it was necessary to have a situation where basic rights were violated as a citizen of the real name system. We did not find other remedies such as civil lawsuits or administrative litigation because we filed a lawsuit against the Constitutional Court,


As a lawyer who has been advising on blockchain for many years, this field will be a significant technological breakthrough to the fourth industry in the future. This personal experience has become an important opportunity for the constitutional wish.


- Anyone can invest cryptocurrency without government regulation.


▲ I think regulation of cryptocurrency is necessary. The problem lies in presenting regulatory measures in the absence of a fundamental institutional and legal basis for this area. There is no government bill now. The problem of cryptocurrency should not be limited to simple computer engineering problems but should be actively discussed in terms of society, philosophy, economy, and law. In this respect, our society has a great intellectual gap about crypto.


Although the constitutional wishes call for the government 's proposal, the intention is to intensify social discussion on crypto through this trial.


- The government must remain silent for a period of up to one year before the legislation.


The government must remain calm. If there is a risk in a particular market, the state must intervene, but it must be in a way that goes through a legitimate process unless it is urgent. It is also an abuse of state power to do this. I think this abuse can overwhelm the damage of investment risks.


You have to respect the market. The government should not make a judgment on the market to win it. If it is an indigenous market that is not illegal, such as drugs or bombs, the government should respect the economic freedom and creativity of the people.


- Do you mean you have to neglect the investment overheating? Money laundering, and the inheritance issue is also a problem.


If the market is dangerous and has to do something at the government level, the Constitution should issue the "urgent financial economic order" given to the president. Failure to exercise this power is not likely to present the situation as yet, or the President does not want to take political responsibility for the exercise of this order. It is the fact that our law has a device for this problem. The government 's regulatory measures have obviously violated the property rights of virtual currency trading participants, rather than stabilizing the market.


The crypto trading participant can see the transaction contents transparently through the blockchain. For example, it is difficult to find the origin of a banknote used for money laundering, but virtual money can be traced. There is no need for a court order. The same is true of inheritance. Rather, taxation can become more transparent. It is argued that the government still does not know the function and effect of crypto.


- I said that I will propose legislation during the constitutional appeal process.


First, we will define basic concepts. In the legal sense, it is necessary to define whether crypto is a thing or a bond. Nakamoto Satoshi refers to the term "currency" in his paper, but it should be referred to as a cryptographic property rather than a monetary one. The legislation to restrict to the government in the constitutional wish process was also named as the "Basic Law on Cryptographic Properties".


Once the legal concept has been established, we will propose a system of trading relations as civil law theory and regulatory relations as public law theory. There is a lot of confusion with the term 'money'. Money is only a figurative expression. The US sees it as an asset, not a financial asset. It should be understood as the same concept as dealing with minerals, metals, and grain on exchanges. The government is fighting the phantom because of the name of money.


- Plan ahead.


▲ Constitutional appeal was submitted to the hearing. We will do our best to provide technical explanations so that trial researchers can understand crypto.




0
0
이 글을 페이스북으로 퍼가기 이 글을 트위터로 퍼가기 이 글을 카카오스토리로 퍼가기 이 글을 밴드로 퍼가기
captcha
자동등록방지 숫자입력

102호(법률)

번호 제목 글쓴이 날짜 조회수
16 프랑스 ICO 관련 법안 승인 Hot 원비인 09-27 162
15 중국 가상화폐 검역 강화 원비인 08-25 106
14 필리핀 ICO법 등장, 동아시아 블록체인 허브 원비인 08-06 136
13 암호화폐 법안 마련 원비인 07-31 157
12 독일 정부 "암호화폐, 금융 안정성에 위협 안돼" 관리자 06-23 198
11 전 SEC 위원, 블록체인 공론화 통한 생태계 구축 필요 관리자 06-12 169
10 싱가포르, 거래소 규제 완화책 원비인 05-29 178
9 뉴욕 '제네시스' 암호화폐 거래소, 첫 비트라이센스 취득 관리자 05-22 170
8 SEC 암호화폐 돌아서나. +2 관리자 05-01 241
7 ICO허브 스위스 재단법인설립 관리자 03-17 240
6 변호사가 보는 블록체인 기술 연재 예정입니다. 관리자 03-07 253
5 가상화폐 보안 대책 마련 관리자 03-03 229
4 가상화폐 공무원 금지령 관리자 03-03 196
3 가상화폐 SEC SAFT 신고 원비인 03-03 332
2 가상화폐 헌법소원 변호사 정희찬 변호사 +1 관리자 03-03 246
1 규제 관련 헌법 소원 사전 심리 통과 +1 관리자 03-03 155