Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 1 of 19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
KENENTY KIM, a/k/a MYUNG KIM,
Defendant.

'
'
'
'
'
'
'

CRIMINAL NO. H-4:19-cr-00783

PLEA AGREEMENT
The United States of America, by and through Ryan K. Patrick, United States
Attorney for the Southern District of Texas, and Adam Laurence Goldman, Assistant
United States Attorney, and the defendant, Kenenty Kim, a/k/a Myung Kim (“Defendant”),
and Defendant=s counsel, pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, state that they have entered into an agreement, the terms and conditions of
which are as follows:
Defendant=s Agreement
1. Defendant agrees to plead guilty to Count 1 of the Information. Count 1
charges Defendant with Conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1956(h). Defendant, by entering this plea, agrees that he is
waiving any right to have the facts that the law makes essential to the punishment either
charged in the information, or proved to a jury or proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Punishment Range
2. The statutory maximum penalty for each violation of Title 18, United States
Code, Section 1956(h), is imprisonment of not more than 20 years and a fine of not more

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 2 of 19

than $500,000.00 or twice the value of the property involved in the transactions, whichever
is greater.

Additionally, Defendant may receive a term of supervised release after

imprisonment of up to 3 years. See Title 18, United States Code, sections 3559(a)(3) and
3583(b)(2).

Defendant acknowledges and understands that if he should violate the

conditions of any period of supervised release which may be imposed as part of his
sentence, then Defendant may be imprisoned for up to 2 years, without credit for time
already served on the term of supervised release prior to such violation. See Title 18,
United Stated Code, sections 3559(a)(3) and 3583(e)(3). Defendant understands that he
cannot have the imposition or execution of the sentence suspended, nor is he eligible for
parole.
Mandatory Special Assessment
3. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, section 3013(a)(2)(A), immediately
after sentencing, Defendant will pay to the Clerk of the United States District Court a
special assessment in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per count of conviction.
The payment will be by cashier=s check or money order, payable to the Clerk of the United
States District Court, c/o District Clerk=s Office, P.O. Box 61010, Houston, Texas 77208,
Attention: Finance.
Immigration Consequences
4. Defendant recognizes that pleading guilty may have consequences with respect
to his immigration status. Defendant understands that if he is not a citizen of the United
States, by pleading guilty he may be removed from the United States, denied citizenship,
2

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 3 of 19

and denied admission to the United States in the future. Defendant understands that if he
is a naturalized United States citizen, pleading guilty may result in immigration
consequences, such as denaturalization and potential deportation or removal from the
United States. Defendant’s attorney has advised Defendant of the potential immigration
consequences resulting from Defendant’s plea of guilty, and Defendant affirms that he
wants to plead guilty regardless of any immigration consequences that may result from the
guilty plea and conviction.
Cooperation
5. The parties understand this agreement carries the potential for a motion for
departure under Section 5K1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant understands and
agrees that whether such a motion is filed will be determined solely by the United States
through the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Texas. Should Defendant=s
cooperation, in the sole judgment and discretion of the United States, amount to
“substantial assistance,” the United States reserves the sole right to file a motion for
departure pursuant to Section 5K1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
Defendant further agrees to persist in that plea through sentencing, fully cooperate with the
United States, not oppose the forfeiture of assets contemplated in paragraphs 17-27 of this
agreement. Defendant understands and agrees that the United States will request that
sentencing be deferred until that cooperation is complete.
6. Defendant understands and agrees that “fully cooperate,” as that term is used
herein, includes providing all information relating to any criminal activity known to
3

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 4 of 19

Defendant, including but not limited to wire fraud and money laundering. Defendant
understands that such information includes both state and federal offenses arising
therefrom. In that regard:
(a)
Defendant agrees that this plea agreement binds only the United States
Attorney for the Southern District of Texas and Defendant; it does not bind
any other United States Attorney or any other unit of the Department of
Justice;
(b)
Defendant agrees to testify truthfully as a witness before a grand jury
or in any other judicial or administrative proceeding when called upon to do
so by the United States. Defendant further agrees to waive his Fifth
Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the purpose of this
agreement;
(c)
Defendant agrees to voluntarily attend any interviews and conferences
as the United States may request;
(d)
Defendant agrees to provide truthful, complete and accurate
information and testimony and understands any false statements made by the
defendant to the Grand Jury or at any court proceeding (criminal or civil), or
to a government agent or attorney, can and will be prosecuted under the
appropriate perjury, false statement, or obstruction statutes;
(e)
Defendant agrees to provide to the United States all documents in his
possession or under his control relating to all areas of inquiry and
investigation; and
(f)
Should the recommended departure, if any, not meet Defendant=s
expectations, the Defendant understands that he remains bound by the terms
of this agreement and cannot, for that reason alone, withdraw his plea.
Waiver of Appeal and Collateral Review
7. Defendant is aware that Title 28, United States Code, section 1291, and Title
18, United States Code, section 3742, afford a defendant the right to appeal the conviction
and sentence imposed. Defendant is also aware that Title 28, United States Code, section
4

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 5 of 19

2255, affords the right to contest or “collaterally attack” a conviction or sentence after the
judgment of conviction and sentence has become final.

Defendant knowingly and

voluntarily waives the right to appeal or “collaterally attack” the conviction and sentence,
except that Defendant does not waive the right to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel on direct appeal, if otherwise permitted, or on collateral review in a motion under
Title 28, United States Code, section 2255. In the event Defendant files a notice of appeal
following the imposition of the sentence or later collaterally attacks his conviction or
sentence, the United States will assert its rights under this agreement and seek specific
performance of these waivers.
8. In agreeing to these waivers, Defendant is aware that a sentence has not yet been
determined by the Court. Defendant is also aware that any estimate of the possible
sentencing range under the sentencing guidelines that he may have received from his
counsel, the United States or the Probation Office, is a prediction and not a promise, did
not induce his guilty plea, and is not binding on the United States, the Probation Office or
the Court. The United States does not make any promise or representation concerning
what sentence the defendant will receive. Defendant further understands and agrees that
the United States Sentencing Guidelines are “effectively advisory” to the Court. See
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Accordingly, Defendant understands that,
although the Court must consult the Sentencing Guidelines and must take them into account
when sentencing Defendant, the Court is not bound to follow the Sentencing Guidelines
nor sentence Defendant within the calculated guideline range.
5

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 6 of 19

9. Defendant understands and agrees that each and all waivers contained in the
Agreement are made in exchange for the concessions made by the United States in this
plea agreement.
The United States= Agreements
10. The United States agrees to each of the following:
(a)
If the Court determines that Defendant qualifies for an adjustment
under section 3E1.1(a) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, and the
offense level prior to operation of section 3E1.1(a) is 16 or greater, the United
States will move under section 3E1.1(b) for an additional one-level reduction
because Defendant timely notified authorities of his intent to plead guilty,
thereby permitting the United States to avoid preparing for trial and
permitting the United States and the Court to allocate their resources more
efficiently.
(b)
In applying United States Sentencing Guideline Subsection
2B1.1(b)(1), if the difference between the actual loss and intended loss is two
offense levels or less, the United States will recommend that actual loss
amount shall be applied. In applying United States Sentencing Guideline
Subsection 2B1.1(b)(1), if the difference between the actual loss and
intended loss is greater than two offense levels or less, the United States will
still recommend that the intended loss amount be reduced by two offense
levels and Defendant does not waive his right to argue at sentencing that the
actual loss as opposed to the intended loss is nevertheless the proper amount
to be considered in applying U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1). In addition, in
applying United States Sentencing Guideline Subsection 2B1.1(b)(1), the
United States agrees that any loss amount will not include a claim made by
Sang Kim that there was any loss or wire transfer involving Defendant of
approximately 90 million dollars into Bank of America account ending in
9692, as there is insufficient evidence to support that claim by Sang Kim.
Agreement Binding –
Southern District of Texas and Western District of Washington Only
11. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas agrees
that it will not further criminally prosecute Defendant in the Southern District of Texas and
6

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 7 of 19

Western District of Washington for offenses arising from conduct charged in the
information. This plea agreement binds only the United States Attorney’s Offices for the
Southern District of Texas and Western District of Washington and Defendant. It does
not bind any other United States Attorney’s Office. The United States Attorney’s Office
for the Southern District of Texas will bring this plea agreement and the full extent of
Defendant’s cooperation to the attention of other prosecuting offices, if requested.
United States= Non-Waiver of Appeal
12. The United States reserves the right to carry out its responsibilities under
guidelines sentencing. Specifically, the United States reserves the right:
(a)
to bring its version of the facts of this case, including its evidence file
and any investigative files, to the attention of the Probation Office in
connection with that office=s preparation of a presentence report;
(b)
to set forth or dispute sentencing factors or facts material to
sentencing;
(c)
to seek resolution of such factors or facts in conference with
Defendant=s counsel and the Probation Office;
(d)
to file a pleading relating to these issues, in accordance with section
6A1.2 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines and Title 18, United States
Code, section 3553(a); and
(e)
to appeal the sentence imposed or the manner in which it was
determined.
Sentence Determination
13. Defendant is aware that the sentence will be imposed after consideration of the
United States Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements, which are only advisory, as
7

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 8 of 19

well as the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, section 3553(a).

Defendant

nonetheless acknowledges and agrees that the Court has authority to impose any sentence
up to and including the statutory maximum set for the offense(s) to which Defendant pleads
guilty, and that the sentence to be imposed is within the sole discretion of the sentencing
judge after the Court has consulted the applicable Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant
understands and agrees that the parties’ positions regarding the application of the
Sentencing Guidelines do not bind the Court and that the sentence imposed is within the
discretion of the sentencing judge. If the Court should impose any sentence up to the
maximum established by statute, or should the Court order any or all of the sentences
imposed to run consecutively, Defendant cannot, for that reason alone, withdraw a guilty
plea, and will remain bound to fulfill all of the obligations under this plea agreement.
Rights at Trial
14. Defendant understands that by entering into this agreement, he surrenders
certain rights as provided in this plea agreement. Defendant understands that the rights of
a defendant include the following:
(a)
If Defendant persisted in a plea of not guilty to the charges, defendant
would have the right to a speedy jury trial with the assistance of counsel.
The trial may be conducted by a judge sitting without a jury if Defendant, the
United States, and the court all agree.
(b)
At a trial, the United States would be required to present witnesses
and other evidence against Defendant. Defendant would have the
opportunity to confront those witnesses and his attorney would be allowed to
cross-examine them. In turn, Defendant could, but would not be required
to, present witnesses and other evidence on his own behalf. If the witnesses
8

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 9 of 19

for Defendant would not appear voluntarily, he could require their attendance
through the subpoena power of the court; and
(c)
At a trial, Defendant could rely on a privilege against selfincrimination and decline to testify, and no inference of guilt could be drawn
from such refusal to testify. However, if Defendant desired to do so, he
could testify on his own behalf.
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea
15.

Defendant is pleading guilty because he is in fact guilty of the charges

contained in Count 1 of the information. If this case were to proceed to trial, the United
States could prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The following
facts, among others would be offered to establish Defendant=s guilt:
I.

Overview

A business email compromise (BEC) is a scheme to defraud businesses. It involves
the use of “spoof” email addresses, which are email addresses with confusingly similar
domain names to “hacked” email accounts, to create fictitious transactions, or to “hijack”
legitimate transactions, in an effort to convince a victim company or individual to send
funds to an account that is actually controlled by those who created the BEC.
II.

The Solid Bridge/Chance Scheme

Solid Bridge Constructions, LLC (“Solid Bridge”) is a general contracting company
located in Huntsville, Texas, which is within the Southern District of Texas. Chance
Contracting, LLC (“Chance”) is a subcontracting company located in Pinehurst, Texas,
which is within the Southern District of Texas. Chance has been a subcontractor of Solid
Bridge in the past for construction work in which Solid Bridge would pay Chance for the
9

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 10 of 19

services Chance performed.
In 2018, Solid Bridge received emails that appeared to come from Brett Chance, the
owner of Chance.

However, these emails were sent from an email address with a

confusingly similar domain name/address to that of Chance. The emails claimed that
Chance was having “issues” receiving check payments from Solid Bridge and the emails
asked Solid Bridge to mail a check to Chance at 6602 63rd Street West, University Place,
Washington, 98467. Solid Bridge complied and on June 25, 2018, it sent a check to
Chance at that address for $210,312.00. Solid Bridge believed this payment was pursuant
to a legitimate invoice from Chance. Chance never received the money.
Instead, on June 29, 2018, the aforementioned check was deposited into an account
ending in “0332” that was controlled by Defendant at the Columbia Bank, 84th and Pacific
in Tacoma, Washington. Defendant had opened this account in March, 2018 under the
name “Kenenty H. Kim, d/b/a/ Reg Construction Solution.” In opening this account,
Defendant listed his email address as KenKimWA@gmail.com. Defendant also listed his
street address for the account as 6602 63rd Street West, University Place, Washington
98467, which is the same address to which Solid Bridge sent the aforementioned check.
Immediately before depositing the check on June 29, 2018, however, Defendant added a
“d/b/a” (“doing business as”) of “Chance Contracting” to the bank account. Attached to
the request to add that “d/b/a” was a Business License Application from the State of
Washington Department of Revenue indicating that Defendant was the owner of Chance
Contracting at the aforementioned address. This application was obtained on that same
10

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 11 of 19

date (June 29, 2018) because Defendant modified his already existing business license
application for Reg Construction Solution by adding Chance Construction as a trade name
to that business license.
After depositing this check, Defendant withdrew $4,500.00 from this account in an
over the counter transaction on July 2, 2018, and withdrew another $10,000 from this
account in an over the counter transaction on July 11, 2018. Defendant also had several
other withdrawals from this account via debit card transactions. Then, on July 11, 2018,
Defendant wired $190,000.00 from this account to a UniBank account ending in “9678.”
Defendant opened this UniBank account on December 15, 2017 and used the address of
6602 63rd Street West, University Place, Washington 98467 in so doing. The day after
this money was wired to the abovementioned UniBank account, Defendant wired
$60,000.00, and later another $40,000.00, from the UniBank account to Siyabonga
Dlamini, who had an address in South Africa.
III.

The Electrolux Scheme

On January 8, 2019, Electrolux Major Appliances North America (“Electrolux”)
wired $333,208.85 to a KeyBank account ending in “1294” that it believed, based on email
communications, was going to one of its (Electrolux) vendors. The abovementioned
KeyBank account was opened by an unindicted co-conspirator on December 28, 2017 with
Defendant’s knowledge and which Defendant utilized.
On January 9, 2019, Defendant and that unindicted co-conspirator visited a
KeyBank branch and obtained a $220,000.00 cashier’s check from that account (1294).
11

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 12 of 19

The cashier’s check was made out to Myung Kim, which is a name Defendant has
previously used. Withdrawn at the same time from the same account was $10,000 in cash,
and as established by security camera footage, Defendant and the unindicted co-conspirator
were standing next to each other at the bank teller counter with one or both of them making
the cash withdrawal.
Defendant deposited the abovementioned $220,000.00 cashier’s check into his
Wells Fargo bank account ending in “18884,” which he opened using his alias of Myung
H. Kim.
Meanwhile, on January 10, 2019, the unindicted co-conspirator wired $50,000.00
from the KeyBank account 1294 to Siyabonga Dlamini, who had an address in South
Africa.
On January 16, 2019, Defendant registered “Kugu Palpal Invest Develop LLC” with
the State of Washington Secretary of State, Corporations and Charities Division, and, in so
doing, used the name Myung Kim and the email account KenKimWA@gmail.com. Then,
on January 18, 2019, Defendant opened a KeyBank account ending in “7661” in the name
of Kugu Palpal Invest Develop.
On the same day (January 18, 2019), Defendant made withdrawals of $170,000.00,
$38,000.00, and $6,000.00 from his abovementioned Wells Fargo bank account ending in
“18884.” Then, on January 22, 2019, Defendant deposited $170,000.00 into his newly
created KeyBank account ending in “7661.” On January 23, 2019, Defendant opened a
bank account in the name of Kugu Palpal Invest Develop LLC with Bank of America
12

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 13 of 19

ending in “6638.” That same day, Defendant withdrew $172,700.00 from his KeyBank
account ending in “7661” and deposited it into his new Bank of America account ending
in “6638.” Then, on January 30, 2019, Defendant wired $160,000.00 from his Bank of
America account ending in “6638” to Siyabonga Dlamini, who had an address in South
Africa.
Breach of Plea Agreement
16. If Defendant should fail in any way to fulfill completely all of the obligations
under this plea agreement, the United States will be released from its obligations under the
plea agreement, and Defendant=s plea and sentence will stand. If at any time Defendant
retains, conceals, or disposes of assets in violation of this plea agreement, or if Defendant
knowingly withholds evidence or is otherwise not completely truthful with the United
States, then the United States may move the Court to set aside the guilty plea and reinstate
prosecution. Any information and documents that have been disclosed by Defendant,
whether prior to or subsequent to this plea agreement, and all leads derived therefrom, will
be used against defendant in any prosecution.
Restitution, Forfeiture, and Fines – Generally
17. This Plea Agreement is being entered into by the United States on the basis of
Defendant’s express representation that he will make a full and complete disclosure of all
assets over which he exercises direct or indirect control, or in which he has any financial
interest. Defendant agrees not to dispose of any assets or take any action that would effect

13

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 14 of 19

a transfer of property in which he has an interest, unless Defendant obtains the prior written
permission of the United States.
18.

Defendant agrees to make complete financial disclosure by truthfully

executing a sworn financial statement (Form OBD-500 or similar form) within 14 days of
signing this plea agreement. Defendant agrees to authorize the release of all financial
information requested by the United States, including, but not limited to, executing
authorization forms permitting the United States to obtain tax information, bank account
records, credit histories, and social security information. Defendant agrees to discuss and
answer any questions by the United States relating to Defendant’s complete financial
disclosure.
19. Defendant agrees to take all steps necessary to pass clear title to forfeitable
assets to the United States and to assist fully in the collection of restitution and fines,
including, but not limited to, surrendering title, executing a warranty deed, signing a
consent decree, stipulating to facts regarding the transfer of title and the basis for the
forfeiture, and signing any other documents necessary to effectuate such transfer.
Defendant also agrees to direct any banks which have custody of his assets to deliver all
funds and records of such assets to the United States.
20.

Defendant understands that forfeiture, restitution, and fines are separate

components of sentencing and are separate obligations.

14

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 15 of 19

Restitution
21. Defendant agrees to pay full restitution to the victims regardless of the count
of conviction. Defendant stipulates and agrees that as a result of his criminal conduct, the
victims incurred a monetary loss of at least $745,540.70. Defendant understands and
agrees that the Court will determine the amount of restitution to fully compensate the
victims. Defendant agrees that restitution imposed by the Court will be due and payable
immediately and that Defendant will not attempt to avoid or delay payment. Subject to
the provisions of paragraph 7 above, Defendant waives the right to challenge in any
manner, including by direct appeal or in a collateral proceeding, the restitution order
imposed by the Court.
Forfeiture
22. Defendant stipulates and agrees that the property listed in the Information’s
Notice of Forfeiture (and in any supplemental Notices) is subject to forfeiture, and
Defendant agrees to the forfeiture of that property. In particular, but without limitation,
Defendant stipulates that the following specific property is subject to forfeiture:
23. Defendant stipulates and agrees that Defendant obtained at least $745,540.70
from the criminal offenses and that the factual basis for his guilty plea supports the
forfeiture of at least $745,540.70. Defendant agrees to forfeit any of Defendant’s property
in substitution, up to a total forfeiture of at least $745,540.70. Defendant agrees to the
imposition of a personal money judgment in that amount.

15

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 16 of 19

24. Defendant agrees to waive any and all interest in any asset which is the subject
of a related administrative or judicial forfeiture proceeding, whether criminal or civil,
federal or state.
25. Defendant consents to the order of forfeiture becoming final as to Defendant
immediately following this guilty plea, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
32.2(b)(4)(A).
26. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 7 above, Defendant waives the right to
challenge the forfeiture of property in any manner, including by direct appeal or in a
collateral proceeding.
Fines
27. Defendant understands that under the Sentencing Guidelines the Court is
permitted to order Defendant to pay a fine that is sufficient to reimburse the government
for the costs of any imprisonment or term of supervised release, if any. Defendant agrees
that any fine imposed by the Court will be due and payable immediately, and Defendant
will not attempt to avoid or delay payment. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 7
above, Defendant waives the right to challenge the fine in any manner, including by direct
appeal or in a collateral proceeding.
Complete Agreement
28. This written plea agreement, consisting of 19 pages, including the attached
addendum of Defendant and his attorney, constitutes the complete plea agreement between
the United States, Defendant, and Defendant’s counsel. No promises or representations
16

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 17 of 19

have been made by the United States except as set forth in writing in this plea agreement.
Defendant acknowledges that no threats have been made against him and that he is pleading
guilty freely and voluntarily because he is guilty.
29. Any modification of this plea agreement must be in writing and signed by all
parties.
Houston
June 2
20
Filed at _________________,
Texas, on __________________________
, 20__.

/s/
Kenenty Kim*
______________________________

Kenenty Kim, a/k/a Myung Kim
Defendant *Signed by Judge Hanks with
Defendant's permission

June 2
Subscribed and sworn to before me on _____________________________
, 20__.
20

DAVID J. BRADLEY, Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CLERK

By:

_________________________________
/s/ Susan Gram
Deputy United States District Clerk

APPROVED:
Ryan K. Patrick
United States Attorney

By: /s/ ____________________________
Adam Laurence Goldman*
Adam Laurence Goldman
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of Texas
Telephone: 713-567-9534
Facsimile: 713-718-3303

____________________________
/s/ John Dennis Hester*
John Dennis Hester
Attorney for Defendant

*Signed by Judge Hanks with
John Hester's permission

*Signed by Judge Hanks with
Adam Goldman's permission

17

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 18 of 19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
KENENTY KIM, a/k/a MYUNG KIM,
Defendant.

'
'
'
'
'
'
'

CRIMINAL NO. H-4:19-cr-00783

PLEA AGREEMENT -- ADDENDUM
I have fully explained to Defendant his rights with respect to the pending
information. I

have reviewed the provisions of the United States Sentencing

Commission’s Guidelines Manual and Policy Statements and I have fully and carefully
explained to Defendant the provisions of those Guidelines which may apply in this case.
I have also explained to Defendant that the Sentencing Guidelines are only advisory and
the court may sentence Defendant up to the maximum allowed by statute per count of
conviction. Further, I have carefully reviewed every part of this plea agreement with
Defendant. To my knowledge, Defendant=s decision to enter into this agreement is an
informed and voluntary one.
/s/ John Dennis Hester*
June 2, 2020
_________________________________
____________________________
John Dennis Hester
Date
*Signed by Judge
Hanks
with
John
Hester's
permission
Attorney for Defendant

I have consulted with my attorney and fully understand all my rights with respect to
the information pending against me. My attorney has fully explained, and I understand,
all my rights with respect to the provisions of the United States Sentencing Commission’s
18

 Case 4:19-cr-00783 Document 45 Filed on 06/02/20 in TXSD Page 19 of 19

Guidelines Manual which may apply in my case. I have read and carefully reviewed every
part of this plea agreement

with my attorney.

I understand this agreement and I

voluntarily agree to its terms.
/s/ Kenenty Kim*
_________________________________
Kenenty Kim, a/k/a Myung Kim
Defendant

June 2, 2020
____________________________
Date

*Signed by Judge Hanks with
Kenenty Kim's permission

19