Korean funeral services company lost $33 million of its customers' money over a bad crypto bet — firm was secretly investing client funds into leveraged crypto ETFs

Gold Ethereum crypto currency on background of chart diagram.
(Image credit: Getty Images)

Last year, a funeral services company in Korean called Bumo Sarang put 59.5 billion Won ($40 million) of its clients' money into a leveraged crypto ETF, which is now worth just 10.2 billion Won ($6.8 million), resulting in a $33 million loss. The company is downplaying this revelation, which was part of a broader investigation done by the Korean Economic Daily that highlights embezzlement as a scarily common practice in the industry.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Hassam Nasir
Contributing Writer

Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.

  • RobtheRobot
    Why is it that even governments think that bean counting with their people's money is acceptable? By that, i mean the industry practice of not doing the decent thing immediately because it would cost more, only acting when their lack is finally discovered. It's a kind of financial bet, where you're betting on lower losses until the discovery being more beneficial even when you have to pay the penalty for not doing so later on.

    This is such a clear financial regulation hole that it must have been considered by someone in the industry and in government years ago, but dismissed as a probabilistic impossibility.

    Then advertising the impending new regulations too far in advance is simply going to make the market panic and that will make the fall-out even worse. This should have been announced once those bills had passed through government, to stop the bad actors absconding. Or perhaps revealed to them privately, along with compulsory exorbitant government backed insurance to cover the likely shortfall. Anything to protect the poor people at the bottom of the chain.

    I'm no financial expert, just in case someone decides to laughingly point out that none of this is possible. Instead of doing that, say why it isn't possible and discuss what can be done. I'm very interested in the realistic approaches that these institutions can take to protect people.
    Reply