The Blue House started using the term ‘cryptocurrency,’ but the term ‘virtual currency’ is still used in a constant stream of government measures. Both ‘cryptocurrency’ and ‘virtual currency’ are not correct terms. However ‘virtual currency’ is worse in that it has two defects. In fact, cryptocurrency is not yet currency, but that is not ‘virtual’ either.

Let us think about other cases of using the word ‘virtual.’ When people experience something as existing, but in fact, it isn’t real. we use  the word. For example, just think about ‘virtual reality’ or ‘virtual cash’ or ‘virtual memory.’ The word tends to give people negative feeling that some fake appears as if it’s real. The government might like this connotation.

But cryptocurrency exists in full force in itself even though it has no tangible form. Namely, it is not just superficial experience. Philosophers describe this as ontologically subjective, but epistemically objective. Copyright, friendship, relationship of a married couple and their family and even the government itself that wants to crack down all forms of cryptocurrency are formless, but no one denies those existences. So the prefix ‘virtual’ is inappropriate.

Meanwhile, cryptocurrency is not a legal payment method, but some states acknowledge such function legally. There is some possibility that it can be used as a form of currency in the future. The part of the phrase ‘Currency’ is not far wrong. At least it is better than the expression ‘voucher’ or ‘certificate’ used by the Ministry of Justice.

Some people claim it has no internal value in itself. This is not appropriate I think. Cryptocurrecy is difficult to quantify for value in the numbers. However, over a long period of time with consuming a lot of computing power to maintain transparency and authenticity of the transaction details information. it has grown. It is a kind of share that can be used for participating in a system of the network growing, so that can be described as representing ‘trust’ or ‘credit’ which, in the capitalist economy, is the most important thing. Isn’t the claim that there is no value in rust network absurd?

We propose that ‘cryptoproperty’ should be used for the name of cryptocurrency.

The Constitutional Court of Korea which is in charge of the case on unconstitutionality of Korean gov’s virtual currency measures does not send the documents which were submitted on Jan. 12 and Jan. 15 even to the petitioner. Although cryptocurrency threatens the inherent right of the state on the right of publication of legal currency, the states should adjust and adapt to historical currents. The government should not cause market disruption. Cryptocurrency and states were created because people do want something to trust. Korean government and other govenments all over the world need to study the appropriate regulatory, rather than abolition and ban on cryptocurrency.

Heechan Jeong(Anguk Law Offices) 02-3210-3330 hcjeong@anguklaw.com