United States v. Kim

ORDER

ELLIS, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s misnamed Motion for Return of Seized Property. Presented for decision is the apparently novel question whether the government must return to defendant the money defendant voluntarily paid to government officials as a gratuity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1). For the reasons that follow, the Court concludes that sound public policy considerations preclude return of the money.

The material facts are uncontroverted. Defendant is a Korean-born, naturalized American citizen. In June 1989, he sent the Immigration and…