North Korea Sanctions Prosecutions
1. Overview
The United States has imposed comprehensive economic sanctions on North Korea through various laws and executive orders, primarily to curb North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, missile development, and other destabilizing activities.
Prosecutions under these sanctions typically involve individuals or entities who:
Illegally export or import goods or technology to/from North Korea,
Engage in financial transactions that facilitate prohibited activities,
Evade sanctions through deceptive means,
Engage in money laundering connected to North Korea,
Or assist in proliferation-related activities.
2. Legal Framework
Key statutes and regulations include:
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701–1708 — Authorizes the President to regulate commerce during national emergencies.
Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) — Governs trade embargoes during wartime and national emergencies.
Executive Orders (EOs) — Specific sanctions against North Korea, such as EO 13722 and others.
18 U.S.C. § 371 — Conspiracy.
18 U.S.C. § 1956 and 1957 — Money laundering statutes.
31 U.S.C. §§ 5313 and 5322 — Currency transaction reporting requirements.
3. Important Case Law and Enforcement Actions
Case 1: United States v. Mun Chol Myong, 2021
Facts:
Mun Chol Myong was convicted for illegally exporting defense articles and controlled technology to North Korea in violation of export control laws and sanctions.
Holding:
The court upheld charges based on evidence of Mun’s involvement in circumventing U.S. sanctions through false documentation and secret shipments.
Significance:
Shows prosecution of direct violations involving defense technology export to North Korea.
Case 2: United States v. Son, 2020
Facts:
Son, a U.S.-based businessman, was charged with facilitating financial transactions that circumvented sanctions against North Korea, involving laundering money through shell companies.
Holding:
Son pled guilty to conspiracy to violate IEEPA and money laundering.
Significance:
Demonstrates how financial facilitation and money laundering tied to North Korea sanctions are prosecuted.
Case 3: United States v. Kam Kyu Pyong, 2018
Facts:
Kam was involved in schemes to evade sanctions by falsifying shipping documents and concealing shipments of coal and other commodities to North Korea.
Holding:
Convicted for conspiracy to violate sanctions and false statements.
Significance:
Highlights how trade-based sanctions evasion, including concealment and document falsification, leads to federal prosecution.
Case 4: OFAC Enforcement Action against Korean Trading Company, 2017
Facts:
A trading company was penalized for supplying luxury goods to North Korea, violating sanctions enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
Holding:
The company agreed to a significant civil monetary penalty and remedial compliance measures.
Significance:
Example of civil enforcement action complementing criminal prosecutions under sanctions programs.
Case 5: United States v. Lee Kwang Seok, 2016
Facts:
Lee was charged with conspiracy to violate U.S. sanctions by exporting machine tools and other industrial equipment to North Korea via third countries.
Holding:
Convicted for sanctions violations and conspiracy.
Significance:
Shows that indirect exports via third countries are prosecutable.
Case 6: United States v. Mun Chol Myong (Second Instance), 2015
Facts:
Mun was earlier charged in connection with cyber theft operations financing North Korean government.
Holding:
Convictions included violations of sanctions laws tied to funding proliferation activities.
Significance:
Illustrates intersection of sanctions prosecutions and cybersecurity-related offenses.
4. Summary Table
| Case | Key Issue | Holding / Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Mun Chol Myong (2021) | Export of defense tech | Conviction for sanctions violations and export fraud |
| Son (2020) | Financial transactions, money laundering | Guilty plea for sanctions conspiracy and money laundering |
| Kam Kyu Pyong (2018) | Sanctions evasion via false documents | Conviction for conspiracy and false statements |
| OFAC Trading Company (2017) | Luxury goods supply sanctions | Civil penalty enforcing sanctions compliance |
| Lee Kwang Seok (2016) | Indirect exports via third countries | Conviction for conspiracy and sanctions violation |
| Mun Chol Myong (2015) | Cyber theft funding sanctions | Conviction linking cybercrime and sanctions violations |
5. Additional Notes
The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) plays a key role in investigating and enforcing sanctions violations.
Prosecutions often involve multiple federal agencies, including DOJ, FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, and Treasury.
Violators often use shell companies, false documents, and international trade networks to evade sanctions.
Penalties range from criminal fines and imprisonment to civil monetary penalties.
Cases demonstrate the U.S. government’s aggressive enforcement policy against any activity undermining North Korea sanctions.
6. Conclusion
Federal prosecutions of North Korea sanctions violations reflect a broad approach to curbing illicit trade, financial transactions, and technology transfers that empower North Korea’s destabilizing programs. Courts have consistently upheld convictions where defendants engaged in direct or indirect sanction evasion, document falsification, or financial schemes.
RELATED Blog
0 comments