[서울신문] The Financial Services Commission and the Korea Bank fight for the rice bowl of the’electric money law’ advocated for national protection

–

–
–
The head-to-head conflict between the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea over the amendment to the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (Electric Money Act) is a growing concern. As the amendment to the Electric Fund Act was submitted to the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee, it is getting more intense. Both places put’protection of the people’ on the front, but the interpretation that the’rice bowl’ (payment and settlement authority) is at odds is generally interpreted. It is said that the Financial Services Commission, which took the lead to raise the rice bowl by raising the public, and the Han Eun, who belatedly risked their life and death because they lost their rice bowl, are playing the’chicken game’.

On the 17th, the amendment to the Electric Money Act was submitted to the Political Affairs Committee on the 17th, initiated by Democratic Party lawmaker Yoon Gwan-seok, who is the chairman of the National Assembly’s political affairs committee. The aim is to promote digital financial innovation and competition by lowering the barriers to entry into the financial industry such as big tech (large information and communications company) and fintech. It is in line with the’Comprehensive Digital Finance Innovation Plan’ released by the Financial Services Commission in July last year.

The confrontation between the Financial Services Commission and the BOK is the liquidation of electronic payment transactions, which was newly established in the revised bill. Liquidation refers to determining the amount to be exchanged with each other by calculating the relationship between bonds and debts arising from transactions between financial institutions. When the KFTC determines the difference between financial institutions, the BOK makes the final payment. It is a structure in which the BOK holds full power. The BOK monitors and manages the entire domestic payment and settlement system as well as the settlement of payment transactions.

However, the revised bill institutionalized the’e-payment transaction clearing industry’ and granted the Financial Services Commission not only permission to liquidation agencies for electronic payment transactions, but also supervisory and sanctions authority. While the Financial Services Commission argues that the regulation is intended to protect consumers by enhancing the safety of loose big tech and fintech financial transactions, the BOK is strongly protesting that the FSC is trying to invade the BOK’s own payment settlement area with big tech ahead.

The BOK expanded its frontline frame from the initial infringement of its own rights to the’Big Brother’ (social surveillance and control power). It is a strategy to focus on the damage to the people in the revised bill against the protection of the people promoted by the Financial Services Commission. “If the amendment is passed, the Financial Services Commission will collect all transaction information of big tech companies such as Naver through the KFTC without any restrictions,” said the BOK. “The amendment is the Big Brother Act.” All personal recharge and transaction details through Big Tech’s payment and settlement methods are collected by the KFTC, and the revised bill allows the Financial Services Commission to look into it. In this regard, Seong-soo Eun, chairman of the Financial Services Commission, said, “(The Big Brother Act) is an excessive exaggeration. I’m a little angry. If my phone call records remain on the carrier, can the carrier be called a big brother? (Han Eun’s point of Big Brother) is nonsense.” He also said, “When there is an incident, we want to see who is the owner of the money by receiving data by law.”

Each of the two institutions was armed with a solid logic. The people are confused as to which institution is right. The key is’whether there is damage to the public’. The Financial Services Commission should withdraw even now if there is any damage to the people, and the BOK should support any law for the people. We look forward to cooperation between the two institutions for the people, not for rice bowls.

Reporter Seung-Hoon Kim [email protected]

–