A KRW 750 Trillion Stablecoin? SOiVA’s Bold Move Raises Big Questions for Crypto Markets

SOiVA files for a KRW 750 trillion stablecoin — and the market is paying attention

SOiVA’s backer, B5G6G DIGITAL CURRENCY Co., Ltd., has filed to roll out a new stablecoin with an eye-popping headline: a planned issuance capacity of KRW 750 trillion. The filing frames the token as part of a broader “service card” aimed at preventing deepfakes and routing payments within a new consumer-facing wallet. The news landed as crypto markets were already digesting questions around stablecoin reserves and regulatory pressure — a perfect storm for scrutiny.

This isn’t a small pilot. If realized at scale, KRW 750 trillion would be large enough to move money markets, reshape liquidity pools and test how local and global regulators respond to private mints that pair payments functions with extra data services.

How the SOiVA token and service card are supposed to work

The filing describes a stablecoin meant to stay pegged to the South Korean won. The issuer is B5G6G DIGITAL CURRENCY Co., Ltd., and the product is sold as part of a SOiVA service card — a digital wallet + identity layer that claims to fight deepfakes by embedding authenticated media markers and linking them to on-chain proofs.

Mechanics on paper are familiar: the token is declared to be backed by reserves or equivalent mechanisms that support the peg. The filing outlines a planned total issuance ceiling — KRW 750 trillion — and a staged issuance schedule rather than a one-time mint. Early stages would be smaller, with capacity to expand as adoption and partners grow.

Governance is set to live with the issuing company, with an oversight board and several named operational roles. The SOiVA card is pitched as the primary consumer touchpoint: users would load funds into a wallet, transact using the stablecoin, and access additional services like media authentication. The document promises audits and a reserve report cadence, but it leaves important details vague: exact reserve composition, who will hold reserves, and whether audits will be independent and public.

What this scale of issuance would mean for liquidity and markets

Put simply: the math matters. KRW 750 trillion is not a niche number. Even a fraction of that supply hitting exchanges or lending markets would create meaningful liquidity shifts. For traders and asset allocators, three immediate effects matter.

First, market liquidity. A large stablecoin tied to the won could attract Korean on-ramps and payment flows, pushing local liquidity away from global staples like US-dollar stablecoins. That might tighten liquidity for KRW trading pairs and increase competition for market-making capital.

Second, tradability and pools. Exchanges would need to decide whether to list the token and how to pair it. If listed broadly, the token could seed large automated market-maker pools, lending markets, and margin instruments. That opens interest-rate and collateral dynamics that can amplify liquidity risk if redemptions spike.

Third, portfolio impact. Crypto funds and treasuries often use stablecoins as short-term stores of value. A new, large KRW stablecoin could become a treasury tool for Korea-focused firms or for any player wanting won exposure without banking rails. That would change portfolio cash allocation choices and could compress yields for existing stablecoin instruments if demand fragments.

For incumbent stablecoin issuers, this represents competitive pressure. Some will see a revenue and market-share threat; others will see arbitrage opportunities between dollar and won-pegged instruments. In short: the token’s potential to shift liquidity flows is real, but depends entirely on whether it can prove backing, convertibility, and exchange access.

Regulatory friction and systemic-risk questions

South Korea has been active on digital-assets rules, and any attempt to issue a KRW-pegged token at scale will attract scrutiny. Regulators will focus on anti-money-laundering (AML) controls, know-your-customer (KYC) flows for the SOiVA card, and how fiat on-ramps are managed.

Beyond Korea, global frameworks are tightening. International bodies and many jurisdictions now expect transparent reserve reporting, recovery plans for runs, and limits on which entities can issue quasi-bank liabilities in crypto form. A private issuer aiming for KRW 750 trillion would face questions about whether it is effectively creating bank-like deposits outside the banking system.

Reserve audits and custody arrangements are central. If reserves are held in commercial bank deposits, that exposes the stablecoin to run risk if counterparties withdraw. If reserves are in government debt, that limits yield but increases safety. The filing hints at audits but does not commit to public, continuous attestation—one of the measures regulators increasingly require to limit systemic contagion.

Red flags and technical questions investors should watch

The SOiVA pitch mixes two different claims — payments plus deepfake prevention — which raises feasibility questions. Embedding media authentication in a payments wallet does not by itself solve the hard technical and legal problems around deepfakes. Investors should treat the anti-deepfake tie-in as a product pitch rather than a guarantee of wider adoption.

Redemption mechanics are another concern. The filing doesn’t fully explain how users will convert tokens back into won at scale during stress. If the market doubts immediate convertibility, the peg will wobble. Concentration risks are present too: if reserves or token holdings sit with a small group of partners, a single counterparty failure could cascade.

Governance transparency is thin. A governance board is named, but there’s little detail on dispute resolution, reserve management rules, or emergency liquidity plans. Those are exactly the documents investors and exchanges will ask for before listing or holding large balances.

What to watch next: filings, partners, listings and audit milestones

Short term, the important signals are concrete and verifiable. Investors should look for:

• Regulatory filings and any replies from South Korean authorities indicating acceptance, restrictions or enforcement action.
• Partnership announcements with banks, custodians or major exchanges — these would make conversion and liquidity more credible.
• Audit firm engagements and public reserve attestations that specify reserve composition and custody chains.
• Exchange listing decisions and initial liquidity provision; small pilots are one thing, broad listings are another.

If the issuer publishes transparent reserve audits, secure custody arrangements and binding redemption guarantees, the project moves from speculative to plausible. If those pieces remain missing, the KRW 750 trillion figure will look like an attention-grabbing ceiling rather than a credible plan — and that should prompt caution from investors and market makers alike.

Sources

• prnewswire.com