NIALL E. LYNCH (CSBN 157959)

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS (CSBN 177944)

MAY LEE HEYE (CSBN 209366)

BRIGID S. MARTIN (CSBN 231705)

CHARLES P. REICHMANN (CSBN 206699)

E. KATE PATCHEN (NY Reg. 41204634)

U.S. Department of Justice

Antitrust Division

450 Golden Gate Avenue	Filed 5/02/2007

Room 10-0101, Box 36046

San Francisco, CA 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-6660

Attorneys for the United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,	)

)

Plaintiff,	)	Case No. CR 06-0692 PJH

v.	)

)	PLEA AGREEMENT

IL UNG KIM,	)

)

Defendant.	)

____________________________________)

PLEA AGREEMENT

The United States of America and Il Ung Kim ("Defendant") hereby enter into the following Plea Agreement pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure ("Fed. R. Crim. P."):

RIGHTS OF DEFENDANT

1.	Defendant understands that he has the right:

(a)	to be represented by an attorney;

(b)	to be charged by Indictment;

(c)	to plead not guilty to any criminal charge brought against him;

(d)	as a citizen and resident of the Republic of Korea ("Korea"), to decline to accept service of the Summons in this case, and to contest the jurisdiction of the United States to prosecute this case against him in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California;

(e)	to have a trial by jury, at which he would be presumed not

guilty of the charge and the United States would have to prove every essential element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt for him to be found guilty;

(f)	to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him and to subpoena

witnesses in his defense at trial;

(g)	not to be compelled to incriminate himself;

(h)	to appeal his conviction; and

(i)	to appeal the imposition of sentence against him.

AGREEMENT TO PLEAD GUILTY

AND WAIVE CERTAIN RIGHTS

2.	Defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives the rights set out in Paragraph 1(c)-
(h) above, including all jurisdictional defenses to the prosecution of this case, and agrees voluntarily to consent to the jurisdiction of the United States to prosecute this case against him in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Defendant also knowingly and voluntarily waives the right to file any appeal, any collateral attack, or any other writ or motion, including but not limited to an appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 or a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 or 2255, that challenges the sentence imposed by the Court if that sentence is consistent with or below the recommended sentence in Paragraph 8 of this Plea Agreement, regardless of how the sentence is determined by the Court. This agreement does not affect the rights or obligations of the United States as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b)-(c). Nothing in this paragraph, however, shall act as a bar to the Defendant perfecting any legal remedies he may otherwise have on appeal or collateral attack respecting claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Further, Defendant will plead guilty to a one-count Indictment filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The Indictment charges that, beginning on or about April 1, 1999, and continuing until on or about June 15, 2002, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ("Samsung") and coconspirators participated in a conspiracy in the United States and elsewhere to suppress and eliminate competition by fixing the price of dynamic random access memory ("DRAM") to be sold to certain original equipment manufacturers of personal computers and servers ("OEMs"), in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. The Indictment further charges that Defendant, an employee of Samsung, joined and participated in the charged conspiracy from on or about April 1, 2001, until on or about June 15, 2002.

3. Defendant, pursuant to the terms of this Plea Agreement, will plead guilty to the criminal charge described in Paragraph 2 above and will make a factual admission of guilt to the Court in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, as set forth in Paragraph 4 below.

FACTUAL BASIS FOR OFFENSE CHARGED

4.	Had this case gone to trial, the United States would have presented evidence sufficient to prove the following facts:

(a) For purposes of this Plea Agreement, the "relevant period" is that period from on or about April 1, 2001, to on or about June 15, 2002. Samsung is an entity organized and existing under the laws of Korea, with its principal place of business in Seoul, Korea. During the relevant period, Defendant was employed by Samsung, and his title was Vice President of Marketing.

(b) DRAM is the most commonly used semiconductor memory product. DRAM provides high-speed storage and retrieval of electronic information in personal computers, servers, and other devices.

(c) In the course of his employment during the relevant period, Defendant was engaged in the sale and marketing of DRAM in the United States. As Vice President of Marketing, Defendant was a superior to some other employees engaged in the sale and marketing of DRAM in the United States and was responsible for setting price guidelines for DRAM worldwide. Those guidelines were a factor Samsung sales personnel used in setting prices to customers worldwide, including the United States.

(d) During the relevant period, Defendant participated in the conspiracy, as described below, in the United States and elsewhere among certain DRAM producers and their officers and employees, the primary purpose of which was to raise and stabilize the price of DRAM sold to certain OEMs. The conspiracy directly affected these OEMs in the United States: Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, Compaq Computer Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, Apple Computer Inc., and Gateway, Inc. The Defendant participated in the conspiracy by engaging in communications with representatives of other DRAM producers and sellers, during which pricing information was exchanged between competitors. That pricing information was used for the purpose and with the effect of influencing the price of DRAM sold to certain OEMs. Also during these communications with representatives of other DRAM producers and sellers, understandings were reached, the ultimate effect of which was to stabilize and raise the price, or limit the rate of price declines, of DRAM sold to certain OEMs.

(e) In addition, during the relevant period, Defendant was aware of and encouraged the involvement of other Samsung employees in this conspiracy.

(f) During the relevant period, DRAM sold by one or more of the conspirators, equipment and supplies necessary to the production and distribution of DRAM, and payments for DRAM, traveled in interstate and foreign commerce. The business activities of Defendant and his coconspirators in connection with the production and sale of DRAM affected by this conspiracy were within the flow of, and substantially affected, interstate and foreign trade and commerce.

(g) Acts in furtherance of this conspiracy were carried out within the Northern District of California. Furthermore, DRAM affected by this conspiracy was sold by one or more of the conspirators to customers in this District.

POSSIBLE MAXIMUM SENTENCE

5.	Defendant understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of Section One of the Sherman Antitrust Act is:

(a)	a term of imprisonment for three years (15 U.S.C. § 1);

(b) a fine in an amount equal to the greatest of (1) $350,000, (2) twice the gross pecuniary gain the conspirators derived from the crime, or (3) twice the gross pecuniary loss caused to the victims of the crime by the conspirators (15 U.S.C. § 1; 18 U.S.C. § 3571(b) and (d)); and

(c)	a term of supervised release of one year following any term of

imprisonment. If Defendant violates any condition of supervised release, Defendant

could be imprisoned for the entire term of supervised release (18 U.S.C. § 3559(a)(5);

18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(3) and (e)(3); and United States Sentencing Guideline ("U.S.S.G."

or "Guidelines") § 5D1.2(a)(3)).

6.	In addition, Defendant understands that:

(a)	pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d), this Court may order him to pay restitution to the victims of the offense; and

(b)	pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(A) and U.S.S.G. § 5E1.3, this

Court is required to order Defendant to pay a $100.00 special assessment

upon conviction for the charged offense.

SENTENCING GUIDELINES

7.	Defendant understands that the Guidelines are advisory, not mandatory, but that the Court must consider the Guidelines, along with the other factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), in determining and imposing sentence. Defendant understands that the Guidelines determinations will be made by the Court by a preponderance of the evidence standard. Defendant understands that although the Court is not ultimately bound to impose a sentence within the applicable Guidelines range, its sentence must be reasonable based upon consideration of all relevant sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8, the United States agrees that self-incriminating information that Defendant provides to the United States pursuant to this Plea Agreement will not be used to increase the volume of affected commerce attributable to Defendant or in determining the Defendant's applicable Guidelines range, except to the extent provided in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8(b). Defendant and the United States agree that the Court should consider the Guidelines in effect at the time of the offense, June 15, 2002, rather than at the time of sentencing, in accordance with U.S.S.G. § 1B1.11(b). The United States and Defendant agree that the applicable advisory Guidelines are: U.S.S.G. § 2R1.1, with a base level of 10; a volume of commerce adjustment of plus 7, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2R1.1(b)(2)(G); a role in the offense adjustment of plus 3, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, for a sub-total of 20; less a 3-level adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a) and (b), for a total offense level of 17. Further, the United States agrees to make a motion for downward departure pursuant to Paragraph 10 herein and U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, recommending that Defendant be sentenced to the recommended sentence agreed to below.

SENTENCING AGREEMENT

8. (a) Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C), the United States and Defendant
agree that the appropriate disposition of this case is, and agree to recommend jointly that the Court impose, a sentence requiring that Defendant pay to the United States a criminal fine of $250,000, payable in full before the fifteenth (15th) day after the date of judgment; a period of incarceration of fourteen months; no order of restitution; and no period of supervised release ("the recommended sentence"). Defendant understands that this Court will order him to pay a $100 special assessment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(A) in addition to any fine imposed. The parties agree that there exists no aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the U.S. Sentencing Commission in formulating the Guidelines justifying a departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0. The parties agree not to seek or support any sentence outside of the Guidelines range nor any Guidelines adjustment for any reason that is not set forth in this Plea Agreement. The parties further agree that the recommended sentence set forth in this Plea Agreement is reasonable.

(b) The United States will not object to Defendant's request that the Court
make a recommendation to the Bureau of Prisons that the Bureau of Prisons designate that Defendant be assigned to a Federal Minimum Security Camp (and specifically to the Lompoc Prison Camp in Lompoc, California) to serve his sentence of imprisonment and that Defendant be released on his own personal recognizance following the imposition of sentence to allow him to self-surrender to the designated institution on a specified date.

9. The United States and Defendant agree that, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.1(b), Defendant should not be ordered to pay restitution in light of the civil cases filed against Samsung, Defendant's employer, including In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation, No. M-02-1486-
PJH, MDL No. 1486, consolidated in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, which potentially provide for a recovery of a multiple of actual damages.

10.	The United States and Defendant agree that the applicable Guidelines fine and incarceration ranges exceed the fine and term of imprisonment contained in the recommended sentence set out in Paragraph 8, above. Subject to the full and continuing cooperation of Defendant, as described in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, and prior to sentencing in this case, the United States agrees that it will make a motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, for a downward departure from the Guidelines fine and incarceration ranges in this case. The motion for downward departure is based on defendant's substantial assistance that has already occurred, and any additional cooperation that may occur prior to sentencing in the government's investigation and prosecutions of violations of federal criminal law in the DRAM industry and other related industries.

11. The United States and Defendant jointly submit that this Plea Agreement and the record that will be created by the United States and Defendant at the plea and sentencing hearing will provide sufficient information concerning Defendant, the offense charged in this case, and Defendant's role in the offense to enable the meaningful exercise of sentencing authority by this Court under 18 U.S.C. § 3553. The United States will not object to Defendant's request that this Court accept Defendant's plea of guilty and impose sentence on an expedited schedule as early as the date of arraignment, based upon the record provided by Defendant and the United States, under the provisions of Rule 32(b)(1), Fed. R. Crim. P., U.S.S.G. § 6A1.1, and Criminal Local Rule 32-1(b). The Court's denial of the request to impose sentence on an expedited schedule will not void this Plea Agreement. Should the Court deny Defendant's request to impose sentence on an expedited schedule, the United States agrees that it will recommend the release of Defendant on his personal recognizance and without bond, under 18 U.S.C. § 3142, without restriction as to travel, pending the sentencing hearing in this case.

12.	The United States and Defendant understand that this Court retains complete discretion to accept or reject the recommended sentence provided for in Paragraph 8 of this Plea Agreement.

(a) If this Court does not accept the recommended sentence, the United States and Defendant agree that this Plea Agreement, except for Paragraph 12(b) below, shall be rendered void. Neither party may withdraw from this Plea Agreement, however, based on the type or location of the correctional facility to which Defendant is assigned to serve his sentence.

(b) If this Court does not accept the recommended sentence, Defendant will be free to withdraw his guilty plea (Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(5) and (d)). If Defendant withdraws his plea of guilty, this Plea Agreement, the guilty plea, and any statement made in the course of any proceedings under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 regarding the guilty plea or this Plea Agreement or made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the government shall not be admissible against Defendant in any criminal or civil proceeding, except as otherwise provided in Fed. R. Evid. 410.

DEFENDANT'S COOPERATION

13.	Defendant will cooperate fully and truthfully with the United States in the prosecution of this case, the current federal investigation of violations of federal antitrust and related criminal laws involving the manufacture or sale of DRAM, any other federal investigation resulting therefrom, and any litigation or other proceedings arising or resulting from any such investigation to which the United States is a party ("Federal Proceeding"). The ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation of Defendant shall include, but not be limited to:

(a)	producing in the United States and at other mutually agreed-

upon locations all non-privileged documents, including claimed personal documents, and other non-privileged materials, wherever located, in the possession, custody, or control of Defendant, requested by attorneys and agents of the United States;

(b)	making himself available for interviews in the United States

and at other mutually agreed-upon locations, not at the expense of

the United States, upon the request of attorneys and agents of the United States;

(c)	responding fully and truthfully to all inquiries of the United

States in connection with any Federal Proceeding, without falsely implicating any person or intentionally withholding any non-privileged information, subject to the penalties of making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) and obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503, et seq.);

(d)	otherwise voluntarily providing the United States with any non-privileged material or information, not requested in (a) - (c) of this paragraph, that he may have that is related to any Federal Proceeding; and

(e)	when called upon to do so by the United States in connection

with any Federal Proceeding, testifying in grand jury, trial, and other judicial proceedings in the United States, fully, truthfully, and under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), making false statements or declarations in grand jury or court proceedings (18 U.S.C. § 1623), contempt (18 U.S.C. §§ 401 - 402), and obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503, et seq.).

GOVERNMENT'S AGREEMENT

14. Subject to the full, truthful, and continuing cooperation of Defendant, as described in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, and upon the Court's acceptance of the guilty plea called for by this Plea Agreement and the imposition of the recommended sentence, the United States will not bring further criminal charges against Defendant for any act or offense committed before the date of this Plea Agreement that was undertaken in furtherance of an antitrust conspiracy involving the manufacture or sale of DRAM or undertaken in connection with any investigation of such a conspiracy ("Relevant Offense"). The nonprosecution terms of this paragraph do not apply to civil matters of any kind, to any violation of the federal tax or securities laws, or to any crime of violence.

15. The United States agrees that when Defendant travels to the United States for interviews, grand jury appearances, or court appearances pursuant to this Plea Agreement, or for meetings with counsel in preparation therefor, the United States will take no action, based upon any Relevant Offense, to subject Defendant to arrest, detention, or service of process, or to prevent Defendant from departing the United States. This paragraph does not apply to Defendant's commission of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001), making false statements or declarations in grand jury or court proceedings (18 U.S.C. § 1623), obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503, et seq.), or contempt (18 U.S.C. §§ 401 - 402) in connection with any testimony or information provided or requested in any Federal Proceeding.

16.	(a)	Subject to the full and continuing cooperation of the Defendant,

as described in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, and upon the Court's acceptance of the Defendant's guilty plea and imposition of sentence in this case, the United States agrees not to seek to remove the Defendant from the United States under Sections 238 and 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1228 and 1229a, based upon the Defendant's guilty plea and conviction in this case, should the Defendant apply for or obtain admission to the United States as a nonimmigrant (hereinafter referred to as the "agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant"). The agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant is the equivalent of an agreement not to exclude the Defendant from admission to the United States as a nonimmigrant or to deport the Defendant from the United States. (Immigration and Nationality Act § 240(e)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(2)).

(b)	The Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice has consulted with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") on behalf of the United States Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"). ICE, on behalf of DHS and in consultation with the United States Department of State, has agreed to the inclusion in this Plea Agreement of this agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant. The Secretary of DHS has delegated to ICE the authority to enter this agreement on behalf of DHS.

(c)	So that the Defendant will be able to obtain any nonimmigrant

visa that he may need to travel to the United States, DHS and the Visa Office, United States Department of State, have concurred in the granting of a nonimmigrant waiver of the Defendant's inadmissibility. This waiver will remain in effect so long as this agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant remains in effect. While the waiver remains in effect, the Department of State will not deny the Defendant's application for a nonimmigrant visa on the basis of the Defendant's guilty plea and conviction in this case, and DHS will not deny his application for admission as a nonimmigrant on the basis of his guilty plea and conviction in this case.

(d)	This agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant will remain

in effect so long as the Defendant:

(i)	acts and has acted consistently with his cooperation

obligations under this Plea Agreement;

(ii)	is not convicted of any felony under the laws of the United

States or any state, other than the conviction resulting from the Defendant's guilty plea under this Plea Agreement or any conviction under the laws of any state resulting from conduct constituting an offense subject to this Plea Agreement; and

(iii)	does not engage in any other conduct that would warrant

his removal from the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The Defendant understands that should the Antitrust Division become aware that the Defendant has violated any of these conditions, the Antitrust Division will notify DHS. DHS will then determine, in consultation with the Antitrust Division, whether to rescind this agreement not to seek to remove the Defendant.

(e)	The Defendant agrees to notify the Assistant Attorney General

of the Antitrust Division should the Defendant be convicted of any other felony under the laws of the United States or of any state.

(f)	Should the United States rescind this agreement not to seek to remove the

Defendant because of the Defendant's violation of a condition of this Plea Agreement, the Defendant irrevocably waives his right to contest his removal from the United States

under the Immigration and Nationality Act on the basis of his guilty plea and conviction

in this case, but retains his right to notice of removal proceedings.
17. Defendant understands that he may be subject to administrative action by federal, state or foreign agencies other than the United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, based upon the conviction resulting from this Plea Agreement, and that this Plea Agreement in no way controls whatever action, if any, other agencies may take. However, the United States agrees that, if requested, it will advise the appropriate officials of any governmental agency considering such administrative action of the fact, manner, and extent of the cooperation of Defendant as a matter for that agency to consider before determining what administrative action, if any, to take.

REPRESENTATION BY COUNSEL

18. Defendant has reviewed all legal and factual aspects of this case with his attorney and is fully satisfied with his attorney's legal representation. Defendant has thoroughly reviewed this Plea Agreement with his attorney and has received satisfactory explanations from his attorney concerning each paragraph of this Plea Agreement and alternatives available to Defendant other than entering into this Plea Agreement. After conferring with his attorney and considering all available alternatives, Defendant has made a knowing and voluntary decision to enter into this Plea Agreement.

VOLUNTARY PLEA

19. Defendant's decision to enter into this Plea Agreement and to tender a plea of guilty is freely and voluntarily made and is not the result of force, threats, assurances, promises, or representations other than the representations contained in this Plea Agreement. The United States has made no promises or representations to Defendant as to whether this Court will accept or reject the recommendations contained within this Plea Agreement.

///

///

///

///

VIOLATION OF PLEA AGREEMENT

20. Defendant agrees that, should the United States determine in good faith, during the period that any Federal Proceeding is pending, that Defendant has failed to provide full and truthful cooperation, as described in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, or has otherwise violated any provision of this Plea Agreement, the United States will notify Defendant or his counsel in writing by personal or overnight delivery or facsimile transmission and may also notify his counsel by telephone of its intention to void any of its obligations under this Plea Agreement (except its obligations under this paragraph), and Defendant shall be subject to prosecution for any federal crime of which the United States has knowledge including, but not limited to, the substantive offenses relating to the investigation resulting in this Plea Agreement. Defendant may seek Court review of any determination made by the United States under this Paragraph to void any of its obligations under the Plea Agreement. Defendant agrees that, in the event that the United States is released from its obligations under this Plea Agreement and brings criminal charges against Defendant for any Relevant Offense, the statute of limitations period for such offense will be tolled for the period between the date of the signing of this Plea Agreement and six (6) months after the date the United States gave notice of its intent to void its obligations under this Plea Agreement.

21.	Defendant understands and agrees that in any further prosecution

of him resulting from the release of the United States from its obligations under this Plea Agreement based on Defendant's violation of the Plea Agreement, any documents, statements, information, testimony, or evidence provided by him to attorneys or agents of the United States, federal grand juries, or courts, and any leads derived therefrom, may be used against him in any such further prosecution. In addition, Defendant unconditionally waives his right to challenge the use of such evidence in any such further prosecution, notwithstanding the protections of Fed. R. Evid. 410.

22.	Defendant agrees to and adopts as his own the factual statement contained in Paragraph 4 above. In the event that Defendant breaches the Plea Agreement, Defendant agrees that the Plea Agreement, including the factual statement contained in Paragraph 4 above, provides a sufficient basis for any possible future extradition request that may be made for his return to the United States to face charges either in the Indictment referenced in Paragraph 2 of this Plea Agreement or in any related indictment. Defendant further agrees not to oppose or contest any request for extradition by the United States to face charges either in the Indictment referenced in Paragraph 2 of this Plea Agreement or in any related indictment.

ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT

23. This Plea Agreement and the Il Ung Kim Cooperation Agreement, filed separately with the Court, constitute the entire agreement between the United States and Defendant concerning the disposition of the criminal charge in this case. This Plea Agreement cannot be modified except in writing, signed by the United States and Defendant.

24. The undersigned attorneys for the United States have been authorized by the Attorney General of the United States to enter this Plea Agreement on behalf of the United States.

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

25. A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original signature for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement. Multiple signature pages are authorized for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement.

DATED: May 1, 2007	Respectfully submitted,

BY:

_______________________________	_______________/s/_________________

Il Ung Kim	Niall E. Lynch, CA No. 157959

Defendant	Nathanael M. Cousins, CA No. 177944

May Lee Heye, CA No. 209366

Brigid S. Martin, CA No. 231705

Charles P. Reichmann, CA No. 206699

E. Kate Patchen, N.Y. Reg. 41204634	_______________________________	Trial Attorneys

Counsel for Defendant	U.S. Department of Justice

Lawrence A. Callaghan, Esq., CA No. 53258 Antitrust Division

Tucker, Ellis & West LLP	450 Golden Gate Avenue

One Market Street	Box 36046, Rm. 10-0101

Steuart Tower, Suite 1300	San Francisco, CA 94102

San Francisco, CA 94105	Tel: 415/436-6660

Tel: 415/617-2400	Fax: 415/436-6687

Fax: 415/617-2409

25. A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original signature for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement. Multiple signature pages are authorized for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement.

DATED: May 1, 2007	Respectfully submitted,

BY:

___________/s/____________________	________________________________

Il Ung Kim	Niall E. Lynch, CA No. 157959

Defendant	Nathanael M. Cousins, CA No. 177944

May Lee Heye, CA No. 209366

Brigid S. Martin, CA No. 231705

Charles P. Reichmann, CA No. 206699

E. Kate Patchen, N.Y. Reg. 41204634	_______________________________	Trial Attorneys

Counsel for Defendant	U.S. Department of Justice

Lawrence A. Callaghan, Esq., CA No. 53258 Antitrust Division

Tucker, Ellis & West LLP	450 Golden Gate Avenue

One Market Street	Box 36046, Rm. 10-0101

Steuart Tower, Suite 1300	San Francisco, CA 94102

San Francisco, CA 94105	Tel: 415/436-6660

Tel: 415/617-2400	Fax: 415/436-6687

Fax: 415/617-2409

25. A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original signature for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement. Multiple signature pages are authorized for the purpose of executing this Plea Agreement.

DATED: May 1, 2007	Respectfully submitted,

BY:

_______________________________	_______________________________

Il Ung Kim	Niall E. Lynch, CA No. 157959

Defendant	Nathanael M. Cousins, CA No. 177944

May Lee Heye, CA No. 209366

Brigid S. Martin, CA No. 231705

Charles P. Reichmann, CA No. 206699

E. Kate Patchen, N.Y. Reg. 41204634	___________/s/____________________	Trial Attorneys

Counsel for Defendant	U.S. Department of Justice

Lawrence A. Callaghan, Esq., CA No. 53258 Antitrust Division

Tucker, Ellis & West LLP	450 Golden Gate Avenue

One Market Street	Box 36046, Rm. 10-0101

Steuart Tower, Suite 1300	San Francisco, CA 94102

San Francisco, CA 94105	Tel: 415/436-6660

Tel: 415/617-2400	Fax: 415/436-6687

Fax: 415/617-2409