A promotional campaign at South Korean cryptocurrency exchange Bithumb turned into a large scale operational incident after a data entry mistake resulted in users receiving bitcoin instead of a small cash-equivalent reward.
Initial reports suggested that certain customers were meant to receive 2,000 Korean won as part of a routine promotional payout. Instead, those accounts were credited with 2,000 bitcoin each. At current market valuations, 2,000 bitcoin represents roughly $140 million per account, transforming what should have been a minor incentive into an extraordinary allocation.
Bithumb later confirmed that the scope of the error was larger than early estimates. According to the exchange, a total of 620,000 bitcoin was mistakenly credited to 695 user accounts. Based on prevailing prices at the time of the incident, that amount corresponded to approximately $43 billion in value. The exchange stated that the issue stemmed from an internal processing mistake and was not connected to external hacking activity or a breach of its security infrastructure. It emphasized that customer asset custody systems were not compromised.
The sudden appearance of large bitcoin balances had an immediate effect on trading activity within the platform. Bithumb reported that the incident contributed to a temporary decline of about 10 percent in bitcoin’s price on its exchange, as some affected users rapidly sold the credited assets. To contain further disruption, the company restricted withdrawals and suspended certain transactions linked to the impacted accounts. It stated that 99.7 percent of the mistakenly issued bitcoin has since been recovered.
The event has revived discussion around the concept often described as “paper bitcoin.” On centralized exchanges, user balances are reflected in internal ledgers rather than always corresponding to coins held in individual blockchain wallets. In practice, exchanges may not maintain a one-to-one on-chain reserve for every displayed balance at every moment. This structural model has previously drawn criticism, most notably during the collapse of Mt. Gox in 2014, which was then the largest bitcoin exchange globally. Its failure exposed major discrepancies between reported and actual holdings.
Data from blockchain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence indicates that Bithumb currently controls digital assets worth approximately $5.3 billion. That figure is substantially lower than the $43 billion temporarily reflected in the erroneous credits, underscoring that the allocation existed within internal accounting records rather than as newly transferred blockchain assets.
Observers on social media platform X questioned how such a large discrepancy could occur without automated safeguards preventing the issuance. Bithumb has faced security challenges in the past. In 2017, an employee’s device was compromised, exposing customer data later used in phishing attempts. In 2018, around $30 million in cryptocurrency was stolen in an attack attributed to the Lazarus Group, an organization widely linked to North Korea. A further breach in 2019 resulted in losses of roughly $20 million and was initially suspected to involve insider participation. In each instance, Bithumb stated that it compensated affected users for lost funds, though earlier incidents included exposure of personal information.
Beyond cybersecurity events, the exchange has also been subject to regulatory scrutiny, including investigations related to alleged fraud, embezzlement, and promotional practices. Reports indicate it was again raided this week over concerns involving misleading advertising.
Bithumb maintains that no customer ultimately suffered a net financial loss from the recent error, though the price movement raised concerns about potential liquidations for leveraged traders. A comparable situation occurred at decentralized exchange Paradex, which reversed trades following a pricing malfunction.
The incident unfolds amid broader market strain, with digital asset prices astronomically below their October peaks and political debate intensifying around cryptocurrency-linked business interests connected to U.S. public figures. Recent disclosures from the U.S. Department of Justice concerning Jeffrey Epstein’s early involvement in cryptocurrency ventures have further fueled online speculation and conspiracy narratives across social platforms.
