#稳定币监管 Seeing the news that Korea's $110 billion in assets are fleeing, my first reaction is—this is the most direct consequence of regulatory gaps.

Thinking carefully, why are Korean investors leaving? It's not that they lack patriotism, but because the "Digital Asset Basic Act" is stuck on the stablecoin issue and hasn't been implemented for a long time. Domestic trading platforms are heavily restricted, leverage and derivatives are all banned, while overseas platforms like Binance and Bybit can do anything. The original intention of regulation was to protect retail investors, but it ended up pushing them into areas that are harder to regulate and riskier.

This gives me a clear warning: **When a market is overly restricted, the truly dangerous things tend to happen**. Those with financial strength will find gaps to escape, leaving retail investors behind who are more vulnerable to being exploited. I've seen too many people trapped in restrictive environments like this, ultimately forced to accept worse trading conditions or be scammed by unregulated platforms.

The hurdle of stablecoin regulation, frankly, is that policymakers are suffering from FOMO—they're afraid stablecoins will spiral out of control, so they prefer to keep the market stagnant rather than quickly implement rules. But the reality is, investors won't stay just to wait. The Korean example is very painful: the market is moving, people are leaving, only growth has stalled.

For us, we must remember this lesson: when choosing trading platforms and ecosystems, not only should we consider current convenience, but also observe the direction of regulation. Those trying to resist regulatory trends, no matter how cheap or high-yield they seem, should be approached with caution. Conversely, markets that actively embrace compliance, even if more restricted, are the ones that can survive longer.