초록
This study examines structural limitations in AML and electronic financial regulation. It proposes an execution-based regulatory architecture in which compliance is embedded into system execution. The study advances a transition from system-based liability to execution-based liability.
The temporal structure of digital assets fundamentally conflicts with the temporal structure of traditional regulatory enforcement.
On distributed ledgers, transactions reach finality within seconds. In contrast, existing frameworks for anti-money laundering (AML), consumer protection, and market surveillance rely on batch processing (D+1 or D+2) and post-hoc enforcement.
This temporal gap goes beyond a simple operational inefficiency. It reflects a structural limitation in enforceability, and represents a core legal challenge in the institutionalization of digital assets, including stablecoins.
This study reframes this challenge as a single proposition: a paradigm shift in regulation from surveillance to enforcement. It examines the legal feasibility and limitations of this shift.
In doing so, the study analyzes three structural limitations commonly found in conventional RegTech models, including post-hoc analytics and middleware policy engines. These limitations are: (a) temporal delay, (b) the possibility of bypass due to external positioning within the network, and (c) the separation between deterministic rules and discretionary judgment.
From a legal perspective, these limitations are examined in a systematic manner. As an alternative, this study proposes the concept of an Embedded Regulatory Node, which is integrated into the consensus or execution layer of distributed ledger systems. The study further analyzes its legal consistency and normative implications.
The Embedded Regulatory Node adopts a two-layer hybrid structure.
The first layer is a Deterministic Rule Engine, which validates key regulatory areas in a modular manner, including reserve and liquidity requirements, transaction limits, the FATF Travel Rule, customer due diligence (KYC), sanctions screening, and asset freezing. If any module detects a violation, the transaction is immediately rejected and is not recorded on the distributed ledger.
The second layer consists of an AI Oracle, which performs discretionary analysis based on machine learning. It detects various risk patterns in real time, including structuring transactions, money laundering pathways, wash trading, market manipulation patterns, abnormal activity in new accounts, and social engineering attacks.
The results from both layers are recorded through a dual system, using on-chain hashes and off-chain detailed logs, ensuring auditability. Updates to regulatory parameters are carried out through on-chain governance, combining proposals from fintech operators with multi-signature approval by supervisory authorities.
The main academic contributions of this study can be summarized in three points.
First, it establishes a paradigm shift in enforceability at the level of general legal theory. Rather than merely referring to the idea of “Code is law”(Lessig), this study develops a more concrete legal discussion on self-executing regulation, including its normative justification, due process considerations, and the possibility of post-hoc remedies.
Second, it analyzes how the integration of deterministic rules and discretionary judgment can be aligned with existing administrative law principles, particularly theories of administrative discretion. It argues that such integration can achieve both consistency and adaptability in regulatory automation.
Third, it introduces an on-chain governance model combining fintech proposals and supervisory approval as a form of collaborative regulation. This model is examined in a comparative perspective, including the Korean Act on the Protection of Virtual Asset Users (effective July 2024), the proposed Digital Asset Basic Act, the EU MiCA Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1114), the FATF Travel Rule, and the U.S. GENIUS Act.
In addition, the study extends its analysis to the consistency with foreign exchange regulation, suggesting that this paradigm may function not only in AML, but also in cross-border payments and capital control frameworks.
This study focuses on the legal structure and normative consistency of the Embedded Regulatory Node. It does not address technical implementation details, such as algorithm design, thresholds, model architecture, or ongoing intellectual property.
The normative conclusion of this study can be summarized as follows: Law in digital financial systems should not operate only through textual interpretation and human enforcement, but should function as a condition of execution within the network.
This perspective may provide a useful academic and policy framework for Korea to take a more active role in the global development of digital financial regulation.
디지털 자산은 전통적 규제 집행의 시간 구조와 충돌하는 시간 스케일에서 작동한다. 분산원장의 트랜잭션은 수 초 내 확정(finality)에 도달하는 반면, 자금세탁방지(AML), 소비자 보호, 시장 감시 체계는 여전히 D+1~D+2의 배치 처리와 사후적 집행에 의존한다. 이러한 시간적 괴리는 규범의 실행성(enforceability)에 관한 구조적 결함으로, 디지털 자산 제도화 과정의 핵심 법학적 과제이다. 본 연구는 이를 감시에서 집행으로의 규제 패러다임 전환으로 재정의하고, RegTech 모델의 구조적 한계(시간 지연, 네트워크 외부 위상, 규칙재량 분리)를 분석한 후, 규제 집행 계층을 분산원장에 직접 내장하는 임베디드 규제 노드(Embedded Regulatory Node) 구조를 제시한다. 이 구조는 확정적 규칙 기반의 사전 차단 계층과 AI 기반 재량 판단 계층으로 구성되며, 온․오프체인 기록과 다중서명 기반 거버넌스를 통해 감사 가능성과 규제 정합성을 확보한다. 학술적 기여는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 규제 패러다임을 법의 실행성 차원에서 재정립하고, Code is Law를 자율집행 규제의 법적 문제로 확장하였다. 둘째, 해당 구조가 한국 행정법상 재량 통제 원리 및 행정기본법 제17조와 정합함을 논증하였다. 셋째, 한국 법제, EU MiCA, FATF 기준, 미국 GENIUS Act와의 비교법적 분석을 수행하였다. 넷째, 외국환거래법(FETA)과의 정합성을 통해 본 모델의 적용 범위를 확장하였다. 다섯째, 핀테크감독기관 협업 기반의 규제 거버넌스 모델을 제시하였다. 본 연구는 법은 네트워크의 실행 조건이 되어야 한다는 명제로 수렴하며, 디지털 자산 시대의 규제 설계 원칙과 정책적 방향을 제시한다.
