Roh Soh-yeong, director of Art Center Nabi, won a court ruling that she should receive 944 billion won in asset division from her ex-husband, Chey Tae-won, chair of SK Group. The Supreme Court had already finalized the couple's divorce and 2 billion won in consolation money, so this trial reconsidered only the division of assets.
The Supreme Court held that even if the 30 billion won that former President Roh Tae-woo allegedly provided to Chey's side did exist, it appeared to have come from bribes received during his presidency and therefore could not be counted as Roh's contribution to asset formation. However, the remand court found that Roh's household work and child-rearing and her external activities related to SK Group contributed to maintaining and increasing the value of the shares Chey owns.
The asset division ratio is two-thirds for Chey and one-third for Roh. The share value was calculated based on Apr. 16, 2024, the date the appellate hearing before remand concluded, which was the final fact-finding stage on the divorce claim.
◇ Although the "Roh Tae-woo 30 billion" was left out of the ledger, SK shares were included
The Seoul High Court's Family Division 1 (presiding judge: Chief Judge Lee Sang-ju) on the 24th, in the remand trial on asset division, excluded the 30 billion won that former President Roh allegedly provided to Chey's father, former SK Group Chair Chey Jong-hyun, from Roh's contribution to asset formation. Even so, it determined that shares including SK㈜ held by Chey were property formed and maintained jointly by the couple.
Before remand, the appellate court had reflected the 30 billion won as a contribution by Roh, but the Supreme Court held that even if the support was true, it could not be regarded as a legally protected contribution. The remand court found that even without the 30 billion won, there remained separate contributions by Roh in the form of household and child-rearing work and external activities related to the group.
Before remand, the appellate court recognized 1.380817 trillion won as the asset division amount. The remand court set 944 billion won, 436.817 billion won less than that. The panel excluded the 30 billion won and shares Chey had gifted to third parties to maintain control or for management activities before the marital breakdown, and lowered Roh's share from 35% to one-third. It did not disclose how much each factor affected the reduction.
The panel recognized that the shares Chey holds were acquired in Chey's name during the marriage and that both contributed to their formation and to maintaining and increasing their value. While the share value rose significantly due to Chey's management activities, it found that Roh's household work, child-rearing, and external activities related to SK Group supported that.
On the other hand, it excluded from division the shares that Chey had gifted to third parties to maintain management control or to preserve the value of marital property before the marital breakdown. This followed the Supreme Court's view that such assets cannot be regarded as still being held and thus cannot be divided.
◇ First trial saw personal property; appeals court recognized jointly created property
In Dec. 2022, the first-instance court viewed SK㈜ shares as Chey's personal property and excluded them from the division, setting the asset division amount at 66.5 billion won. It said it was hard to see that Roh had substantially contributed to the formation of the shares or the rise in their value.
In May 2024, the appellate court before remand reversed that. It found that during the marriage the share value rose due to Chey's management activities and that Roh's household and child-rearing work and group-related activities also contributed to asset formation. Including the 30 billion won support as Roh's contribution, it split Chey 65% and Roh 35%.
In Oct. last year, the Supreme Court did not treat as a ground for reversal the inclusion of SK㈜ shares among assets to be divided. Instead, it found that the 30 billion won could not be recognized as a contribution protected by law, and that assets Chey had already disposed of to maintain management control or preserve the value of marital property could not be included in the division. It especially noted that treating the 30 billion won as a contribution affected the 35% division ratio, and sent the case back for further review.
◇ Stock price gains considered only in the ratio, not the total amount to be divided
The panel calculated the share value based on the appellate hearing conclusion date before remand, not the time the remand hearing ended. Because the Supreme Court is a court of law that reviews whether lower courts correctly applied the law, it is not a reference point for pricing.
As a rule, even when asset division proceedings continue after a divorce, property and prices are determined as of the end of the final fact-finding instance. Price changes after that can be exceptionally reflected only when ignoring them would create an undue windfall or loss for one side, but the panel found that the stock rally this time did not meet that standard.
Although SK㈜ shares rose sharply, the gains were not added directly to the total assets to be divided. That is because it cannot be ruled out that Chey's managerial contribution influenced the subsequent rise, and because revaluing at each endpoint of the remand proceedings could cause the division amount to vary widely depending on the judgment date.
However, the sharp rise in the stock price was considered as one factor in determining each party's final share. While the total assets were fixed at past prices, the fairness of the overall allocation was adjusted through the ratio.
Taking into account that SK㈜ shares underpin the group's management control, the panel ordered that Chey retain the shares and pay 944 billion won in cash to make up the shortfall in Roh's share. If payment is not made after the ruling is finalized, delayed interest of 5% per year will accrue from the next day until full repayment.
The ruling showed that even shares claimed by one spouse as personal property can become divisible assets if the other spouse contributed to maintaining or increasing their value during the marriage.