2. 43K is the actual loss from the heist, and another 43K that he's giving back to his customers, he takes a double hit.
What? he doesn't need to reimburse lost profits out of pocket. If I lent you $10 and someone mugs you and steals those $10, you still owe me $10, and you don't have $10, but I wouldn't say you lost $20.
Either way, I think it's very shaky reasoning to assume that just because he can afford to cover 43k lost customer coins, that he made that much in profit, and is thus trading against his customers.
Regarding his incorporation, he's said he'll announce details about it soon. I still believe that there's probably at least one fairly large investor behind all of this.