비트코인은 디지털 시대에 등장한 금과 같은 존재인가, 아니면 19세기 초반에 문제가 되었던 ‘거품 튤립’에 불과한 것인가? 온라인 가상통화인 비트코인은 2017년 3월 3일 1비트코인 당 약 1,242달러를 기록해 온스 당 1,241달러에 거래되던 금의 가치를 처음으로 뛰어넘어 화제가 되었다. 우리나라의 비트코인 거래량도 전 세계에서 5번째로 많은 나라로 영국, 러시아, 인도네시아와 같은 대형 금융센터의 거래량을 이미 넘어섰다. 이러한 비트코인은 IT기술의 발달로 인하여 등장한 새로운 개념의 화폐이지만, 향후 세계화폐로서의 기능을 할 것으로 전망하고 있다. 다만, 현재의 비트코인은 아직 실험 중에 있고, 그 전망 또한 불투명하므로 신중한 접근이 필요하다. 우리나라는 최근 가상통화에 대처하기 위하여 2017년 7월 31일 전자금융거래법 일부개정 법률안이 발의되었다. 이에 본 논문은 먼저, 비트코인의 개념과 비트코인의 채굴 및 거래 현황을 살펴보고, 다음으로 2017년 4월 1일부터 시행된 일본의 개정 자금결제법의 개정 경위와 같은 법의 구체적인 내용을 살펴보고자 한다. 마지막으로 2017년 7월 31일 발의된 우리나라의 전자금융거래법 개정안을 일본의 개정 자금결제법과 비교 분석을 하여 향후 법제도의 개선을 위한 시사점을 찾고자 한다.
Is bit coin anything like gold in the digital age, or like just a bubble tulip in the early 19th century? It became a topic on the facts that the online virtual currency, so to speak, Bit coin was to surpass the value of gold traded at $ 1241 per ounce on March 3, 2017, about $ 1,242 per 1-bit coin firstly. The trading amounts of Korea's bit coin are the fifth largest in the world and have already exceeded the volume of large financial centers such as the UK, Russia and Indonesia. This bit coin is a currency of new type bone due to the development of IT technology, but it is expected to function as a world currency in the future. However, the current bit coin is still experimental, and its outlook is also opaque, so a careful approach is needed. Recently, in order to deal with virtual currencies, some amendments to the Electronic Financial Transactions Act were initiated on July 31, 2017. Firstly, this article will examine the concept of bit coin, mining and trading appearance of bit coin, and then examines the concrete details of the law, such as the amendment of Japan's revised fund settlement law, which took effect on April 1, 2017. Finally, I will analyze the revised bill of the electronic financial transaction law of Korea, which was initiated on July 31, 2017, and compare it with Japan's revised fund settlement law to find implications for the amendment of the legal system in the future. As a result, I will propose the following several points. First, it is necessary to clarify the legal nature of the regulation in order to prevent confusion when regulating the virtual currency. Second, I will propose amendments to the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. So to speak concretely, it is necessary to improve the definition of virtual currency, virtual carrier handling business, protection and supervision of virtual currency users. Third, it is necessary to examine whether the prohibition of lending of name is necessary in relation to the protection of virtual currency users, and the obligation to conclude contracts with designated virtual currency exchange service dispute settlement institutions. Fourth, it is necessary to compensate for the ban on money laundering activities by referring to the Japanese system. Finally, in order to activate the transaction of virtual currencies at the policy level, it is necessary to complement the problem of security and safety.