Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1273

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff 

V. 

SAFETY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC., 

(d/b/a "FOREXNPOWER"), GNS CAPITAL, 

INC. (d/b/a/ "FOREXNPOWER"), JOHN H. 

WON, SUNGMI KANG, and TAE HUNG 

KANG (a/k/a "KEVIN KANG"), 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 15-CV-5551 (RID) (PK) 

(ECF CASE) 

[PROPO~ED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND CONSENT ORDER FOR 

PERMANENT INJUNCTION, RESTITUTION, AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF 

AGAINST DEFENDANT TAE HUNG KANG (a/k/a "KEVIN KANG") 

I. INTRODUCTION 

On September 24, 2015, Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

("Commission" or "CFTC") filed its Complaint in this matter against Defendants Safety Capital 

Management, Inc., (d/b/a "ForexnPower") ("Safety Capital"), GNS Capital, Inc. (d/b/a/ 

"ForexnPower") ("GNS"), John H. Won ("Won"), Sungini Kang, and Tae Hung Kang (a/k/a "Kevin 

Kang") ("Kang") (collectively, "Defendants") seeking injunctive and other equitable relief, as 

well as the imposition of civil penalties for: violations by Defendants of Sections 4b(a)(2)(A) 

and (C) and 4Q(l)(A)-(B) of the Commodity Exchange Act (the "Act"), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a)(2)(A), 

(C), 6Q(l )(A)-(B), and Commission Regulation ("Regulation") 5.2(b )(l) and (3 ), 17 C.F .R. 

§ 5.2(b)(l), (3) (2021); additional violations by Safety Capital and GNS directly, and Won and 

Sungini Kang indirectly, of Sections 2(c)(2)(C)(iii)(l)(aa)-(cc) and 4m(l) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§§ 2( c )(2)(C)(iii)(l)(aa)-( cc), 6m(l ), and Regulations 4.20(a)-( c) and 5.3(a)(2)-(3), 17 C.F .R. 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 1274

§§ 4.20(a)-(c), 5.3(a)(2)-(3) (2021); and additional violations by GNS directly and Won 

indirectly of Regulation 1.31, 17 C.F .R. § 1.31 (2021 ). On November 30, 2015, the Clerk of the 

Court issued certificates of default against Defendants Safety Capital and GNS. 

II. CONSENTS AND AGREEMENTS 

To effect settlement of all charges alleged in the Complaint against Defendant Kang 

without a trial on the merits or any further judicial proceedings, Defendant Kang: 

I. Consents to the entry of this Consent Order for Permanent Injunction, Restitution, 

and Other Equitable Relief Against Defendant Tae Hung Kang (a/k/a "Kevin Kang") ("Consent 

Order"); 

2. Consents to the entry of this Consent Order, including the findings of fact and 

conclusions of law in this Consent Order, which he admits; 

3. Affirms that he has read and agreed to this Consent Order voluntarily, and that no 

promise, other than as specifically contained herein, or threat, has been made by the Commission 

or any member, officer, agent, or representative thereof, or by any other person, to induce 

consent to this Consent Order; 

4. Acknowledges service of the summons and Complaint; 

5. Admits the jurisdiction of this Court over him and the subject matter of this action 

pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § I 3a-1; 

6. Admits the jurisdiction of the Commission over the conduct and transactions at 

issue in this action pursuant to the Act; 

7. Admits that venue properly lies with this Court pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13a-l(e); 

8. Waives: 

a. Any and all claims that he may possess under the Equal Access to Justice 

Act, 5 U.S.C. § 504 and 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and/or the rules promulgated 

2 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 1275

by the Commission in conformity therewith, Part 148 of the Regulations, 

17 C.F.R. pt. 148 (2021), relating to, or arising from, this action; 

b. Any and all claims that he may possess under the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, tit. II, 

§§ 201-53, 110 Stat. 847, 857-74 (codified as amended at 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2412 and in scattered sections of5 U.S.C. and 15 U.S.C.), relating to, or 

arising from, this action; 

c. Any claim of Double Jeopardy based upon the institution of this action or 

the entry in this action of any order imposing any other relief, including 

this Consent Order; and 

d. Any and all rights of appeal from this action; 

9. Consents to the continued jurisdiction of this Court over him for the purpose of 

implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of this Consent Order and for any other 

purpose relevant to this action, even if Defendant now or in the future resides outside the 

jurisdiction of this Court; 

10. Agrees that he will not oppose enforcement of this Consent Order on the ground, 

if any exists, that it fails to comply with Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 

hereby waive any objection based thereon; 

11. Agrees that neither he nor any of his agents or employees under his authority or 

control shall take any action or make any public statement denying, directly or indirectly, any 

allegation in the Complaint or the Findings of Fact or Conclusions of Law in this Consent Order, 

or creating or tending to create the impression that the Complaint and/or this Consent Order is 

without a factual basis; provided, however, that nothing in this provision shall affect his: 

(a) testimonial obligations, or (b) right to take legal positions in other proceedings to which the 

Commission is not a party. Defendant shall comply with this agreement, and shall undertake all 

steps necessary to ensure that all of his agents and/or employees under his authority or control 

understand and comply with this agreement; 

3 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 1276

12. Admits to all of the findings of fact made in this Consent Order for purposes of 

this proceeding; 

I 3. Consents to the use of the findings and conclusions in this Consent Order in this 

proceeding and in any other proceeding brought by the Commission or to which the Commission 

is a party or claimant, and agrees that they shall be taken as true and correct and be given 

preclusive effect therein, without further proof; 

14. Does not consent, however, to the use of this Consent Order, or the findings and 

conclusions herein, as the sole basis for any other proceeding brought by the Commission or to 

which the Commission is a party, other than a: statutory disqualification proceeding; proceeding 

in bankruptcy, or receivership; or proceeding to enforce the terms of this Consent Order; 

15. Agrees to provide immediate notice to this Court and the Commission by certified 

mail, in the manner required by paragraph 63 of this Consent Order, of any bankruptcy 

proceeding filed by, on behalf of, or against him, whether inside or outside the United States; and 

16. Agrees that no provision of this Consent Order shall in any way limit or impair 

the ability of any other person or entity to seek any legal or equitable remedy against him in any 

other proceeding. 

III. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that there is good cause for the entry 

of this Consent Order and that there is no just reason for delay. The Court therefore directs the 

entry of the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, permanent injunction and equitable 

relief pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-l, as set forth herein. 

4 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 1277

THE PARTIES AGREE AND THE COURT HEREBY FINDS: 

A. Findings of Fact 

The Parties to this Consent Order 

17. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an independent federal 

regulatory agency charged by Congress with responsibility for administering and enforcing the 

provisions of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-26, and the Regulations promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. 

pts. 1-190 (2021). 

18. Defendant Tae Hung Kang (a/k/a "Kevin Kang") was a resident of Queens, New 

York and was the President and Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") of Safety Capital Management 

Inc. ("Safety Capital") d/b/a ForexnPower during the Relevant Period in the Complaint. 

Defendant Tae Hung Kang has never been registered with the Commission in any capacity. 

19. Safety Capital Management, Inc., which did business as "ForexnPower," was a 

New York corporation with its last known place of business at 216-19 Northern Blvd., Suite 2, 

Bayside, NY 11361. Safety Capital has never been registered with the Commission in any 

capacity. 

20. Between October 2010 through December 2013 (the "Relevant Period''), 

Defendant Tae Hung Kang acted as an Associated Person ("AP") of a Commodity Trading 

Advisor ("CTA'') by soliciting and accepting clients of Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower for 

managed off-exchange retail foreign currency exchange ("forex") trading accounts. 

21. These Safety Capital forex trading clients did not have assets or net worth 

exceeding $10 million (or $5 million if the individual enters into the transaction to manage the 

risk associated with an asset owned or liability incurred, or reasonably likely to be owned or 

incurred, by the individual). Thus, Safety Capital's forex trading clients were not Eligible 

5 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 1278

Commercial Entities ("ECEs") or Eligible Contract Participants ("ECPs") as defined by Sections 

I a(l 7) and (18) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ I a(l 7), (18). Safety Capital had discretionary trading 

authority over these retail forex trading clients. 

22. Safety Capital's retail forex trading clients had managed accounts at a Futures 

Commission Merchant ("FCM") and their off-exchange forex transactions were offered to or 

entered into with a person that is not an ECP or ECE on a leveraged or margined basis, and the 

transactions did not result in actual delivery within two days or otherwise create an enforceable 

obligation to make/take delivery in connection with the line of business. 

23. During the Relevant Period, Defendant Tae Hung Kang also acted as an AP of a 

Commodity Pool Operator ("CPO") by soliciting and accepting funds from participants for a 

commodity pool operated by Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower. 

24. In soliciting retail forex customers and pool participants, Defendant Tae Hung 

Kang used the mail, email, telephone or other instrumentalities of interstate commerce. 

25. For example, on or about March 15, 2012, Defendant Tae Hung Kang solicited 

pool participants and retail forex customers at a ForexnPower seminar and represented that he 

was the CEO of the company and that the ASET automated trading signals program would, in 

five, years tum a $3,000 investment into over $900,000 in profits. The latter representation was 

false or misleading because no customer of Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower had such high 

proportionate returns and, in fact, the majority of its customers lost money trading forex with 

Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower. 

26. On another occasion, in or around the summer of 2012, Defendant Tae Hung 

Kang, again representing himself as the CEO of ForexnPower, falsely stated to a customer that 

the company had yielded I 0% profits per month and encouraged the customer to invest because 

6 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 1279

this was a "lifetime opportunity" and the customer should "not miss out." This representation 

was false because no customer of Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower had I 0% profits per month 

and the majority of customers actually had net losses. 

27. After this customer invested, he requested a withdrawal. Tae Hung Kang told the 

customer that he could pay the customer back in a few weeks because the company was 

expecting an investment from another investor. This latter representation is consistent with a 

Ponzi scheme in which investors are paid with other investors' money. 

B. Conclusions of Law 

Jurisdiction and Venue 

28. Section 6c(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, authorizes the Commission to seek 

injunctive and other relief against any person whenever it shall appear to the Commission that 

such person has engaged, is engaging, or is about to engage in any act or practice constituting a 

violation of any provision of the Act, or any rule, regulation, or order thereunder. 

29. The CFTC has jurisdiction over the conduct and forex transactions at issue in this 

case pursuant to Section 2(c)(2)(C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C). 

30. Venue lies properly with this Court pursuant to Section 6c(e) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§ 13a-1 ( e ), because Defendant Kang resided and/or transacted business in this District, several of 

his customers resided in this District, and certain transactions, acts, practices, and courses of 

business described in the Complaint occurred in this District. 

Violations of the Act and Regulations 

31. During the Relevant Period, Safety Capital acted as both a retail forex CPO and a 

retail forex CTA as those terms are defined by Section la(l 1) (CPO) and (12) (CTA) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § la(] I), (12), and Regulation 5.l(d)(l) (forex CPO) and (e)(l) (forex CTA), 17 C.F.R. 

§ 5.l(d)(l), (e)(l) (2021). 

7 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 1280

32. Defendant Tae Hung Kang acted as an AP of a CT A and CPO, in this case Safety 

Capital, as defined by Regulations 1.3, 17 C.F .R. § 1.3 (2021 ). 

33. Safety Capital d/b/a ForexnPower customers were retail forex customers as that 

term is defined by Regulation 5 .1 (k), 17 C.FR. § 5 .1 (k) (2021 ). Safety Capital d/b/a 

ForexnPower customers traded off-exchange retail forex transactions as that term is defined by 

Section 2(c)(2)(C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C), and Regulation 5.l(m), 17 C.F.R. § 5.l(m) 

(2021 ). 

34. By the conduct described above, Defendant Tae Hung Kang violated 7 U.S.C. 

§§ 6b(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 6Q(l)(A)-(B) and 17 C.F.R. § 5.2(b)(l) and (3). 

IV. PERMANENT INJUNCTION 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

35. Based upon and in connection with the foregoing conduct, pursuant to Section 6c 

of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, Defendant Tae Hung Kang is permanently restrained, enjoined and 

prohibited from directly or indirectly: 

a. In connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract for sale of 

any commodity for future delivery ... that is made, or to be made, for or on 

behalf of, or with, any other person, other than on or subject to the rules of a 

designated contract market--(A) to cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or defraud 

the other person; ... (C) willfully to deceive or attempt to deceive the other 

person by any means whatsoever in regard to any order or contract or the 

disposition or execution of any order or contract, or in regard to any act of agency 

performed, with respect to an order or contract for or, in the case of paragraph (2), 

with the other person, in violation of Section 4b(a)(2)(A) and (C) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(A), (C); and 

8 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 1281

b. By use of the mails or by any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, in 

or in connection with any retail forex transaction: (l) to cheat or defraud or 

attempt to cheat or defraud any person; ... or (3) [w]illfully to deceive or attempt 

to deceive any person by any means whatsoever in violation of Commission 

Regulation 5.2(b), 17 C.F.R. § 5.2(b) (2021); and 

c. While acting as an associated person of a commodity pool operator or a 

commodity trading advisor, by use of the mail or any means or instrumentality of 

interstate commerce, from (A) employing any device scheme, or artifice to 

defraud any client or participant or prospective client or participant; or (B) 

engaging in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates as a 

fraud or deceit upon any client or participant or prospective client or participant in 

violation of Section 4Q( 1 )(A)-(B) of the Act, 7 U .S.C. § 6Q( 1 )(A)-(8). 

36. Defendant Kang is also permanently restrained, enjoined and prohibited from 

directly or indirectly: 

a. Trading on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that term is defined 

in Section la(40) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § la(40)); 

b. Entering into any transactions involving "commodity interests" (as that term is 

defined in Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2021 )) for his own personal account or 

for any account in which he has a direct or indirect interest; 

c. Having any commodity interests traded on his behalf; 

d. Controlling or directing the trading for or on behalf of any other person or entity, 

whether by power of attorney or otherwise, in any account involving commodity 

interests; 

9 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 10 of 17 PageID #: 1282

e. Soliciting, receiving or accepting any funds from any person for the purpose of 

purchasing or selling any commodity interests; 

f. Applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the 

Commission in any capacity, and engaging in any activity requiring such 

registration or exemption from registration with the Commission, except as 

provided for in Regulation 4.14(a)(9), 17 C.F .R. § 4.14(a)(9) (2021 ); and/or 

g. Acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 3.1 (a), 17 C.F .R. 

§ 3.1 (a) (2021 )), agent or any other officer or employee of any person registered, 

exempted from registration or required to be registered with the Commission 

except as provided for in 17 C.F.R. § 4.14(a)(9). 

V. RESTITUTION 

A. Restitution 

3 7. Defendant Tae Hung Kang shat I pay restitution in the amount of eight hundred 

thirty-five thousand fifty-eight dollars ($835,058.00) ("Restitution Obligation"). If the 

Restitution Obligation is not paid immediately, post-judgment interest shall accrue on the 

Restitution Obligation beginning on the date of entry of this Consent Order and shall be 

determined by using the Treasury Bill rate prevailing on the date of entry of this Consent Order 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. 

38. Tae Hung Kang is currently a defendant in a criminal action based on, in part, the 

misconduct that is at issue in this matter. See United States v. Kang, 18-CR-00 184 (filed April 

11, 2018, E.D.N.Y.). On March 30, 2021, Defendant Kang pleaded guilty to one count of 

conspiracy to commit securities fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. For any amounts paid in 

satisfaction of restitution ordered in the criminal action ("Criminal Restitution Obligation") the 

Defendant shall receive a dollar-for-dollar credit against the Restitution Obligation. Within ten 

10 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 11 of 17 PageID #: 1283

days of any payment made in partial or full satisfaction of the Criminal Restitution Obligation, 

Defendant Kang shall, under a cover letter that identifies the name and docket number of this 

proceeding, transmit to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 

Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581, and the Office of 

Administration, National Futures Association, 300 South Riverside Plaza, Suite 1800, Chicago, 

Illinois 60606, copies of the form of payment in satisfaction of the Criminal Restitution 

Obligation. 

39. To effect payment of the Restitution Obligation and the distribution of any 

restitution payments to customers or pool participants, the Court appoints the National Futures 

Association (''NF A") as monitor ("Monitor"). The Monitor shall receive Restitution Obligation 

payments from Defendant made pursuant to this Consent Order and make distributions as set 

forth below. Because the Monitor is acting as an officer of this Court in performing these 

services, the NFA shall not be liable for any action or inaction arising from NF A's appointment 

as Monitor, other than actions involving fraud. 

40. Any payment Defendant Kang shall make in satisfaction of the Restitution 

Obligation under this Consent Order shall be made to the Monitor in the name "Tae Hung Kang-

(CFTC v Safety Capital) Settlement Account" and such payments shall be sent by electronic 

funds transfer, or by U.S. postal money order, certified check, bank cashier's check, or bank 

money order, to the Office of Administration, National Futures Association, 300 South Riverside 

Plaza, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois 60606 under cover letter that identifies the paying Defendant 

and the name and docket number of this proceeding. Defendant shall simultaneously transmit 

copies of the cover letter and the form of payment to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity 

11 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 12 of 17 PageID #: 1284

Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 

20581. 

41. The Monitor shall oversee the Restitution Obligation and shall have the discretion 

to determine the manner of distribution of any such funds it obtains in an equitable fashion to 

Safety Capital customers or pool participants identified by the Commission or may defer 

distribution until such time as the Monitor deems appropriate. 

42. Defendant shall cooperate with the Monitor as appropriate to provide such 

infonnation as the Monitor deems necessary and appropriate to identify customers and pool 

participants to whom the Monitor, in its sole discretion, may determine to include in any plan for 

distribution of any Restitution Obligation payments. Defendant shall execute any documents 

necessary to release funds that he may have in any repository, bank, investment or other financial 

institution, wherever located, in order to make partial or total payment towards the Restitution 

Obligation. 

43. The Monitor shall provide the Commission at the beginning of each calendar year 

with a report detailing the disbursement of funds to customers and pool participants during the 

previous year. The Monitor shall transmit this report under a cover letter that identifies the name 

and docket number of this proceeding to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581. 

44. The amounts payable to each customer and pool participant shall not limit the 

ability of any customer or pool participant from proving that a greater amount is owed from 

Defendant or any other person or entity, and nothing herein shall be construed in any way to 

limit or abridge the rights of any customer or pool participant that exist under state or common 

law. 

12 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 13 of 17 PageID #: 1285

45. Pursuant to Rule 71 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each Safety Capital 

d/b/a ForexnPower customer or pool participant who suffered a loss is explicitly made an 

intended third-party beneficiary of this Consent Order and may seek to enforce obedience of this 

Consent Order to obtain satisfaction of any portion of the restitution that has not been paid by 

Defendant to ensure continued compliance with any provision of this Consent Order and to hold 

Defendant in contempt for any violations of any provision of this Consent Order. 

46. To the extent that any funds accrue to the U.S. Treasury for satisfaction of 

Defendant's Restitution Obligation, such funds shall be transferred to the Monitor for 

disbursement in accordance with the procedures set forth above. 

B. Provisions Related to Monetary Sanctions 

47. Partial Satisfaction: Acceptance by the CFTC or the Monitor of any partial 

payment of Defendant's Restitution Obligation shall not be deemed a waiver of his obligation to 

make further payments pursuant to this Consent Order, or a waiver of the CFTC's right to seek to 

compel payment of any remaining balances. 

VI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

48. Until such time as Defendant Tae Hung Kang satisfies in full his Restitution 

Obligation under this Consent Order, upon the commencement by or against Defendant of 

insolvency, receivership or bankruptcy proceedings or any other proceedings for the settlement 

of Defendant's debts, all notices to creditors required to be furnished to the Commission under 

Title 11 of the United States Code or other applicable law with respect to such insolvency, 

receivership, bankruptcy or other proceedings, shall be sent to the address below: 

Secretary of the Commission 

Legal Division 

Cofiffilodity Futufes Trading Cofiiifiission 

Three Lafayette Centre 

1155 21st Street N.W. 

13 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 14 of 17 PageID #: 1286

Washington, DC 20581 

49. Notice: All notices required to be given by any provision in this Consent Order 

shall be sent certified mail, return receipt requested, as follows: 

Notice to Commission: 

Manal M. Sultan 

Deputy Director 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

290 Broadway, Ste. 600 

New York, NY 10007 

Notice to Defendant: 

Tae Hung Kang a/k/a Kevin Kang 

INMATE #90811-053 

FMC DEVENS 

FEDERAL MEDICAL CENTER 

P.O.BOX879 

A YER, MA 01432 

All such notices to the Commission shall reference the name and docket number of this action. 

50. Change of Address/Phone: Until such time as Defendant satisfies in full his 

Restitution Obligation, as set forth in this Consent Order, Defendant shall provide written notice 

to the Commission by certified mail of any change to his telephone number and mailing address 

within ten calendar days of the change. 

51. Entire Agreement and Amendments: This Consent Order incorporates all of the 

terms and conditions of the settlement among the parties hereto to date. Nothing shall serve to 

amend or modify this Consent Order in any respect whatsoever, unless: (a) reduced to writing; 

(b) signed by all parties hereto; and (c) approved by order of this Court. 

52. Invalidation: If any provision of this Consent Order or if the application of any 

provision or circumstance is held invalid, then the remainder of this Consent Order and the 

14 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 15 of 17 PageID #: 1287

application of the provision to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected by the 

holding. 

53. Waiver: The failure of any party to this Consent Order or of any customer or pool 

participant at any time to require performance of any provision of this Consent Order shall in no 

manner affect the right of the party or customer or pool participant at a later time to enforce the 

same or any other provision of this Consent Order. No waiver in one or more instances of the 

breach of any provision contained in this Consent Order shall be deemed to be or construed as a 

further or continuing waiver of such breach or waiver of the breach of any other provision of this 

Consent Order. 

54. Waiver of Service, and Acknowledgement: Defendant waives service of this 

Consent Order and agrees that entry of this Consent Order by the Court and filing with the Clerk 

of the Court will constitute notice to the Defendant of its terms and conditions. Defendant 

further agrees to provide counsel for the Commission, within thirty days after this Consent Order 

is filed with the Clerk of Court, with an affidavit or declaration stating that Defendant has 

received and read a copy of this Consent Order. 

55. Continuing Jurisdiction of this Court: This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this 

action to ensure compliance with this Consent Order and for all other purposes related to this 

action, including any motion by Defendant to modify or for relief from the terms of this Consent 

Order. 

56. Injunctive and Equitable Relief Provisions: The injunctive and equitable relief 

provisions of this Consent Order shall be binding upon Defendant, upon any person under his 

authority or control, and upon any person who receives actual notice of this Consent Order, by 

15 
Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 16 of 17 PageID #: 1288

personal service, e-mail, facsimile or otherwise insofar as he or she is acting in active concert or 

participation with Defendant. 

57. Counterparts and Facsimile Execution: This Consent Order may be executed in 

two or more counterparts, all of which shall be considered one and the same agreement and shall 

become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the parties hereto 

and delivered (by facsimile, e-mail, or otherwise) to the other parties, it being understood that all 

parties need not sign the same counterpart. Any counterpart or other signature to this Consent 

Order that is delivered by any means shall be deemed for all purposes as constituting good and 

valid execution and delivery by such party of this Consent Order. 

58. Contempt: Defendant understands that the terms of the Consent Order are 

enforceable through contempt proceedings, and that, in any such proceedings he may not 

challenge the validity of this Consent Order. 

59. Agreements and Undertakings: Defendant shall comply with all of the 

undertakings and agreements set forth in this Consent Order. 

16 
s/Raymond J. Dearie

Case 1:15-cv-05551-RJD-PK Document 62 Filed 08/31/22 Page 17 of 17 PageID #: 1289

There being no just reason for delay, the Clerk of the Court is hereby ordered to enter this 

Consent Order for Permanent Injunction, Restitution, and Other Equitable Relief Against 

Defendant Tae Hung Kang a/k/a Kevin Kang forthwith and without further notice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED on this 3._Llfaay of~1⁄2--u~S~+-- --~• 2022. 

RA YMONhffA~E\:Y- , ( 

UNITED STATES D~TRICT JUDGE 

CONSENTED TO AND APPROVED BY: 

Dated: 

avid Acevedo 

Chief Trial Attorney 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

290 Broadway, Suite 600 

New York, NY 10007 

646-746-9700 

Dacevedo@cftc.gov 

Dated: ~ I ,;i.v&o ~.a17