Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-DC  1:20-cr-00173
Case Name:   USA v. BAN
  Press Releases:
            WASHINGTON – Yang Ban Corporation, a company established in the British Virgin Islands in 2014 that operated in South East Asia pleaded guilty today to conspiring to launder monetary instruments in connection with evading sanctions on North Korea and deceiving correspondent banks into processing U.S. dollar transactions.  The company will pay a financial penalty totaling $673,714.04. 

            In pleading guilty, Yang Ban admitted and accepted responsibility for its criminal conduct.  Yang Ban also agreed to implement rigorous internal controls and to cooperate fully with the Justice Department, including by reporting any criminal conduct by an employee.

            “Evasion of the United States sanctions laws allows North Korea to continue its dangerous and persistent proliferation activities and to develop weapons of mass destruction,” said John C. Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security.  “This defendant utilized dual invoicing practices and provided false statements to conceal the ultimate destination of commodities it purchased for North Korea, duping U.S. correspondent banks into processing U.S. dollar transactions that they would not otherwise have authorized.  The disruption of this activity demonstrates that the Justice Department will leverage its significant investigative assets to uncover and punish North Korean efforts to engage in fraud, money laundering, and sanctions violations all to bolster its oppressive regime.”

            “Yang Ban undermined the integrity of our financial system and harmed our national security by circumventing banks’ sanction and anti-money laundering filters as part of a scheme to launder funds for North Korean customers,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Sherwin.  “Today’s action demonstrates this office’s commitment to find and punish companies, no matter where they are located, whose actions illegally facilitate North Korean sanctions evasion.”

            “Once again, the Department of Justice has disrupted an effort by North Korea to covertly access the U.S. financial system in violation of U.S. sanctions,” said Alan E. Kohler Jr, Assistant Director of the FBI's Counterintelligence Division. “The FBI will aggressively investigate companies established for the sole purpose of evading U.S. sanctions on North Korea. The sanctity of the U.S. financial system will not be compromised.”

            “Companies making deliberate efforts to launder money through the United States will be shut down,” said Michael F. Paul, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Minneapolis Division.  “I commend the hard work of the agents and analysts who investigated this case.”

            “Homeland Security Investigations is committed to working with our law enforcement partners to protect the integrity of the U.S. financial system, leveraging  investigative assets in our combined efforts to expose the North Korean regime’s attempt to evade U.S. sanctions,” said Raymond Villanueva, Special Agent in Charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Washington, D.C.

            U.S. sanctions and banking regulations prevented correspondent banks in the United States from processing wire transfers on behalf of customers located in North Korea.  According to admissions and court documents, beginning in at least February 2017 and continuing until at least May 2018, Yang Ban deceived banks in the U.S. into processing transactions for North Korean customers of Yang Ban.  Yang Ban and its co-conspirators utilized financial cutouts and front companies to conceal the North Korean nexus.  Yang Ban specifically admitted to conspiring with other, including SINSMS, a subsequently designated company, to falsify shipping records. For example, in May 2017, a North Korean co-conspirator notified Yang Ban and its co-conspirators of a company which would ship to Nampo, North Korea, but would require two separate sets of shipping documents. One set of documents would be free of any indication that the shipment was going to North Korea, and a second set of documents would contain the North Korea details for internal record keeping.

            Yang Ban admitted that it was aware that it needed to distance itself from North Korean front companies in order to protect it from additional scrutiny from banks that process U.S. dollar transactions.  For example, in September 2016, Yang Ban caused an employee to inform a North Korean customer that Yang Ban was unable to use a related company for further business with North Korea due to bank restrictions on such transactions

            The investigation was conducted by the FBI’s Minneapolis Field Office with support from HSI’s Washington D.C. Office.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Zia M. Faruqui and Trial Attorney David Recker of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section are prosecuting the case with assistance from Paralegal Specialist Brian Rickers, Legal Assistant Jessica McCormick, and Records Examiner Angela De Falco.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1raKqGWpN85jjOB7nSPL16cPkdlokmyLhXEgTYGAjJjY
  Last Updated: 2023-10-23 17:20:09 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the probation sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

Description: The total probation time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and probation was imposed
Format: N4

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E