South Korea's Digital Asset Framework Act remains scheduled for a November National Assembly review, according to the Financial Services Commission, which rejected claims that personnel changes and a delayed government draft had stalled the country's second-stage crypto legislation. Seo Na-yoon, head of the FSC's virtual asset division, said the regulator and lawmakers already agree on the direction of rules covering issuance and distribution, including stablecoins. The remaining dispute is timing and detail, not whether the framework moves ahead. That distinction matters because ten competing bills are already before lawmakers and U.S. stablecoin rules are creating a deadline Korea cannot control.
Digital Asset Framework Act heads to November review
Seo told a National Assembly seminar in Seoul on Sept. 22 that the bill review subcommittee is expected to take up the framework in November. "The FSC is not dragging its feet at all. We share the same view," she said. "The direction has already been set, and while detailed discussions may be necessary in the process, there is certainly no intention on the FSC's part to delay." She also said a change in the official responsible for the work would not alter the schedule.
The government has not finished its consolidated proposal, but lawmakers do not need to begin from an empty page. Ten bills addressing digital assets and stablecoins are pending in the National Assembly. Democratic Party lawmakers Min Byung-duk, Ahn Do-geol, Kim Hyun-jung, Lee Kang-il and Park Sang-hyuk have submitted proposals, as have People Power Party lawmakers Kim Eun-hye, Kim Jae-seop, Choi Bo-yoon, Lee Sung-kwon and Kim Sung-won. Min said a public hearing was expected at the end of September. The FSC plans to combine its work with those proposals rather than wait for a standalone government bill to move first.
That approach reduces delay risk, but it also leaves the hardest compromises for committee review. Agreement on broad direction does not settle who may issue a stablecoin, what reserves must hold, how redemptions work, which disclosures token issuers owe buyers or how responsibility is divided across regulators. The same problem stopped the U.S. CLARITY Act despite broad support. Direction is the easy part. Definitions and liability decide whether the law works.
Stablecoin rules remain the central fight
South Korea's existing Virtual Asset User Protection Act focuses on customer protection and unfair trading. The second-stage legislation moves into market construction: issuance, disclosure, distribution, service-provider obligations and stablecoins. Issuer eligibility is the most consequential unresolved issue. The Bank of Korea has repeatedly favored a bank-led model for won-denominated stablecoins, arguing that private issuance could affect monetary policy, payments and financial stability. Its preferred opening structure places banks at the center of consortiums.
Commercial institutions are not waiting for the law. Hana Bank and Upbit Global have agreed to build Travel Rule infrastructure connecting banks and virtual asset providers. The Bank of Korea has started a 24-hour won settlement pilot, while Korean groups are testing cross-border stablecoin transfers with Japanese partners. Those projects are creating facts on the ground before lawmakers decide the final perimeter.
The bank-led model offers clear compliance advantages. Banks already maintain customer checks, payment systems, liquidity controls and supervisory relationships. It also risks concentrating a new market in institutions that have the strongest incentive to preserve the old one. Nonbank technology companies may build better wallets and settlement products but find themselves dependent on a bank consortium for issuance. The November review will show whether Korea chooses a phased opening or writes bank preference directly into law.
The U.S. timetable is pressuring Seoul
Min used the American GENIUS Act as the argument for speed. The U.S. law takes effect Jan. 18, 2027, even though agencies missed a July 2026 deadline to complete all implementing rules. Min said he found roughly 200 stablecoin projects being prepared in the U.S. and warned that even a few dozen approvals could send new products into Korea before locally regulated alternatives are ready.
The number is Min's claim, not a published regulator tally, but the competitive concern is credible. Dollar stablecoins already dominate global crypto settlement. A U.S. federal framework can strengthen their institutional acceptance while Korea is still deciding whether won tokens may be issued outside banks. A delay would not freeze the market. It would leave domestic users choosing foreign products under rules written elsewhere.
Korea's government included stablecoin legislation, crypto exchange-traded funds, tokenized government bonds and a framework for cross-border stablecoin transactions in its second-half policy roadmap. The FSC has pledged to complete second-stage legislation in 2026. November therefore is not merely another review date. It is the last practical window for committee work before year-end passage becomes difficult.
What November must resolve
The committee needs to answer four questions clearly. Who can issue won-backed stablecoins? What assets and liquidity standards support redemption? Which regulator supervises issuance and distribution? How do cross-border tokens enter Korean platforms without bypassing domestic protections? Vague compromises on any one point will move uncertainty into secondary rules and slow commercial launches anyway.
The strongest outcome would be a phased framework with bank participation at launch, explicit paths for qualified nonbanks, transparent reserve requirements and interoperable compliance standards. The weakest would be a nominal bill that postpones every economic decision. Korea already has licensed exchanges, bank partnerships, tokenization pilots and a central-bank settlement program. It does not lack infrastructure. It lacks a legal map connecting those pieces.
Seo's assurance removes one concern: the FSC says it is not delaying. The November subcommittee will test the more important claim, that regulators and lawmakers truly share the same view once each clause has winners and losers. Watch the issuer eligibility language first. It will reveal whether South Korea is creating a stablecoin market or reserving one for its banks.
