SEC Willing to Wait for Do Kwon

Reading Time: 2 minutes
  • The SEC has offered to delay the civil trial against Terraform Labs and Do Kwon in order to facilitate Kwon’s presence
  • The agency believes that Kwon could be in the US by mid-March and has pushed for an April start
  • Kwon faces allegations of orchestrating a $40 billion crypto fraud involving the collapsed Terra USD stablecoin in May 2022

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has agreed to postpone the civil trial against Terraform Labs and co-founder Do Kwon in order to facilitate Kwon’s extradition and attendance. In a Monday filing, the SEC justified its call for a “modest” delay, citing Kwon’s expressed desire to attend, his agreement to extradition from Montenegro, and the potential for him to be in the US by mid-March. Kwon is accused of orchestrating a $40 billion cryptocurrency fraud through the Terra USD stablecoin which collapsed spectacularly in May 2022.

Kwon Won’t Push for Further Delay

The SEC sued Terraform Labs and Kwon in February last year, alleging that Kwon hid the truth over the stability of the UST stablecoin given that he knew it had the potential to be volatile.

The agency has opposed the proposition of separate trials for Terraform and Kwon, asserting that the cases were nearly identical, and holding two trials would unnecessarily burden whistleblowers and retail investors with testifying twice.

US District Judge Jed Rakoff will determine the trial date, with the SEC proposing April 15 to accommodate scheduling conflicts.

Kwon’s Extradition Stayed

Kwon, who also faces US criminal charges and an extradition request from South Korea, was arrested in Montenegro last March. His lawyer sought a delay until at least March 18 and stated on Monday that no further adjournments would be sought, even if Kwon couldn’t attend on the new date.

Kwon dodged imminent extradition to the US or South Korea in December following an appeals court decision in Montenegro which overturned a previous ruling, citing “significant breaches of criminal proceedings” and unclear reasoning for its decision. 

Share