[Inside Korea Crypto] Circle and Tether Visit Korea Back-to-Back, Escalating the Race for KRW Stablecoin Leadership

Last week (April 13–19), the biggest story in South Korea’s crypto industry was the consecutive visits of Circle and Tether, the two global stablecoin heavyweights. As legislation for a won-denominated stablecoin approaches, both firms moved to meet local banks and exchanges, signaling the start of a full-scale battle to secure early leadership in Korea’s stablecoin market.

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire Makes a 24-Hour Korea Trip, Holds Back-to-Back Meetings with Banks and Exchanges

The most closely watched development last week was Circle founder and CEO Jeremy Allaire’s 24-hour visit to Korea from April 13 to 14. Despite the short schedule, Allaire reportedly met with major commercial banks including KB Kookmin Bank and NH NongHyup Bank, as well as domestic fintech firms and executives from Korea’s five major crypto exchanges, to discuss partnerships around stablecoins and on-chain financial infrastructure.

During his visit, Allaire emphasized the need for a won-based stablecoin and shared the following views:

• “A KRW stablecoin is essential if the Korean economy is to avoid being left behind in the future digital economy.”
• “We do not plan to issue a KRW stablecoin directly. It should be led by Korean financial institutions.”
• “Once regulations in Korea become clear, Circle will establish a local entity and formally enter the market.”
• “We are also reviewing opportunities to invest in Korean startups and venture capital.”

Industry participants generally viewed the trip as more exploratory than immediately outcome-driven. While local companies sought to gain global reference value through contact with Circle, many observers said the discussions remained at the level of strategic direction-setting due to the regulatory vacuum surrounding won stablecoin legislation.

Tether Also Visits Korea During the Same Period, Meets KB Financial and Coinone

Following Circle’s move, Tether, the world’s largest stablecoin issuer by market capitalization, was also confirmed to have visited Korea around the same period, holding meetings with KB Financial Group and Coinone. This created a rare scenario in which the two dominant players in the global stablecoin market were simultaneously courting Korea’s banking sector.

The back-to-back visits are widely seen as strategic efforts to secure partnerships with major Korean financial institutions before a KRW stablecoin bill is passed. KB Kookmin Bank, in particular, is said to have engaged with both Circle and Tether, drawing attention to what future collaboration structures may emerge.

Digital Asset Framework Act, ICO Revival, and Brokerage Acquisitions of Exchanges: Three Regulatory Tracks Move at Once

Alongside the stablecoin issue, South Korea’s regulatory landscape is being reshaped quickly. According to an industry guide released by Tiger Research on April 9, major institutions are already moving to capture market share even before won stablecoin legislation is finalized. The report described this as an unusual development ahead of full-scale discussions on the second stage of the Digital Asset Framework Act.

Talks on allowing ICOs are also gaining momentum. Earlier in March, the Financial Supervisory Service held a briefing session attended by around 350 participants to discuss how to build a supervisory framework that could allow ICOs, which have been broadly banned since 2017. That has raised the possibility of a turning point after nearly nine years of restrictions.

Meanwhile, securities firms are increasingly being linked to crypto exchange acquisitions. Korea Investment & Securities is reportedly pursuing Coinone, while Mirae Asset is said to be in the process of acquiring Korbit. If these deals materialize, they could significantly reshape the structure of the domestic crypto market.

Market Data: Bitcoin Reclaims $75,000, Upbit Maintains Dominance

The market showed signs of recovery in the third week of April. As of April 17, Bitcoin stood at $75,152, up 4.72% from the previous week. That marked a rebound within about two weeks from $66,889 on April 3, when it had posted a weekly decline of 2.77%.

In Korea’s KRW market, Upbit maintained its dominant lead with roughly 71.6% market share. Bithumb held second place at around 25%. In terms of exchange banking partners, Upbit works with KB Kookmin Bank for verified-name accounts, while Bithumb and Coinone partner with NH NongHyup Bank. Analysts noted that Circle and Tether’s focused outreach to KB Kookmin Bank and NH NongHyup Bank during their Korea visits was likely tied to this real-name account structure.

Meanwhile, access to the Binance app in Korea has reportedly been blocked since January 2026. As Korean investors face tighter access to offshore exchanges, the influence of the country’s five major domestic exchanges appears to be growing further.

Key Takeaway: Positioning Competition Intensifies During the Regulatory Gap

Overall, the defining theme of last week was the intensifying competition to secure leadership in the stablecoin market. Circle and Tether’s near-simultaneous visits and outreach to Korean banks suggest a calculated attempt to preemptively lock in partnerships before won stablecoin legislation is enacted.

That said, South Korea remains in a regulatory gray zone, meaning the market is still more in an exploratory and positioning phase than one of tangible execution. With three major regulatory tracks moving at once—the second phase of the Digital Asset Framework Act, an ICO supervisory regime, and broker-led exchange acquisitions—the key industry question over the coming months will be how domestic financial institutions and exchanges choose to align with global players.

What to Watch Next Week

• Follow-up discussions between KB Kookmin Bank, NH NongHyup Bank, Circle, and Tether
• Whether the Financial Services Commission unveils a timeline for phase-two Digital Asset Framework Act legislation
• Progress on Korea Investment & Securities–Coinone and Mirae Asset–Korbit acquisition talks
• Whether the Financial Supervisory Service releases additional ICO supervisory guidelines