CERTIFICATATION OF EXTRADITABILITY AND ORDER OF COMMITMENT In this action, the United States Government (the “Government”), acting at the request of the Government of the Republic of Korea, seeks a certification that Hyuk Kee Yoo (“Yoo”) is extraditable pursuant to the Extradition Treaty Between the United States of America (the “United States” or the “Government”) and the Republic of Korea (“Korea”), signed on June 9, 1998 and entered into force on December 20, 1999 (the “Treaty”). Extradition Treaty Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Korea, K.-U.S., June 9, 1998, S. TREATY DOC. No. 106-2 [hereinafter "Extradition Treaty"]. Yoo opposes extradition, arguing that (1) there is insufficient evidence for a finding of probable cause; and (2) it is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that the extradition request demonstrates probable cause and satisfies the relevant requirements. Furthermore, the Court lacks authority to determine whether this prosecution is time-barred, as that inquiry is a discretionary matter reserved for the Secretary of State. Accordingly, the Court certifies that Yoo is extraditable pursuant to the Treaty. I. BACKGROUND A. Procedural History On or about February 27, 2020, the Government filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) requesting the issuance of a warrant for the arrest of Yoo pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3184 and the Treaty, and attaching various documents submitted by Korea in support of its extradition request. (Docket No. 2). The Court issued an arrest warrant, and the Government arrested Yoo on or about July 22, 2020. During the initial presentment, at which Yoo appeared with counsel, the Court ordered that Yoo be detained without bail pending the outcome of the proceeding, and set a briefing schedule for any motion to dismiss. On October 5, 2020, counsel for Yoo moved to dismiss on the grounds that Yoo is not extraditable, (Docket Nos. 17, 18), and after being granted a six-week extension,1 on December 8, 2020, the Government filed a brief in support of extradition attaching additional materials to supplement Korea’s extradition request, (Docket Nos. 27, 27-1, 27-2). On December 21, 2020, counsel for Yoo filed a brief in reply. (Docket No. 30). On January 7, 2021, the Government submitted further supplemental materials from the Republic of Korea in support of its request for extradition, (Docket Nos. 31, 31-1), and counsel for Yoo filed a response to that submission on January 25, 2021, (Docket Nos. 34, 34-1, 34-2). On March 3, 2021, the Court held an evidentiary hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3184. (See March 3, 2021 Minute Entry). At the hearing, the Government submitted the following documentary evidence, which the Government had previously provided to the Court: Government Exhibit A: Declaration from the Department of State, the applicable extradition treaty, and the various submissions Korea made in support and clarification of its extradition request, (Docket Nos. 2-1-2-8); Government Exhibit B: Supplemental submission from Korea dated November 23, 2020 and authenticated by the State Department on December 17, 2020, (Docket No. 27-1); Government Exhibit C: Supplemental submission from Korea dated August 11, 2020, and authenticated by the State Department on January 29, 2021, (Docket No. 27-2); and Government Exhibit D: Supplemental submission from Korea dated January 6, 2021, and authenticated by the State Department the same day, (Docket No. 31-1). Counsel for Yoo submitted seventy-one additional exhibits, which they had also previously provided to the Court. (See Docket No. 38). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3190, the Court admitted the Government’s exhibits into evidence, with no objection from Yoo, as well as Defense Exhibits 5 and 8 through 15, with no objection from the Government. However, the Government objected to admission into evidence of the remainder of Yoo’s exhibits, and the Court reserved ruling on that issue. (Id.). The Court also heard argument from the Government and counsel for Yoo for and against extradition. B. Allegations against Yoo The Complaint summarizes the allegations underlying Korea’s charges against Yoo as follows. Yoo is the son of Byung Eyn Yoo, the prominent founder and former leader of a religious group in Korea called the Evangelical Baptist Church (the “Church”). (Docket Nos. 2 6a; 2-3 at 21, EX-YOO-00099).2 Yoo became the de facto leader of the Church in 2010. (Docket No. 2 6a). Yoo’s family collectively controls a company called I-One-I Holdings (“I-One-I”), which in turn holds a controlling interest in a number of commercial entities. (Docket Nos. 2 1.6b; 2-4 at 21-25, EX-YOO-S1-00021-25; see also Docket No. 2-8 at 4-5, EX-YOO-S5-00004-5). Between January 2008 and March 2014, Yoo leveraged his family’s power as business and religious leaders in Korea to take the assets of a number of these entities (the “Companies”). (Docket No. 2
6-7). Specifically, Yoo conspired with the chief executive officers (“CEOs”) of the Companies to enter into sham contracts through which Yoo embezzled millions of dollars from the Companies to the detriment of their shareholders. (Id. 6). To do so, Yoo used his stature in the Church, his connection with his father, and the overlapping leadership structure between the Companies and I-One-I to cause the executives to enter into contracts for fraudulent goods or services in exchange for payments to him or his private company, Key Solutions. (Id.
