Seoul: SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won has presented a legal argument to the Supreme Court stating that stocks in SK Inc. and other assets listed under his name should not be divided with his estranged wife, Roh Soh-yeong, as part of their divorce settlement, according to judicial officials.
According to Yonhap News Agency, Chey’s argument, submitted in a written document to the Supreme Court, comes in response to a previous ruling by the Seoul High Court. In May, the court had ordered Chey to pay approximately 1.38 trillion won (US$1 billion) in property division and an additional 2 billion won as solatium to Roh in what has become the country’s most expensive divorce suit.
In his submission, Chey has cited Articles 830 and 831 of the Civil Act, which deal with the management and use of peculiar property by spouses. Peculiar property, as defined by the law, includes assets owned individually by either spouse prior to the marriage or acquired independently during the marriage. Chey argues that the properties
listed under his name, acquired during their marriage, should be considered his peculiar property, and thus not subject to division, regardless of any indirect contributions by Roh.
The Seoul High Court, however, had previously not recognized these assets as Chey’s peculiar property. The court noted that some of the funds used for acquiring these assets included about 30 billion won transferred decades ago from Roh’s father, former President Roh Tae-woo, to Chey’s father, Chey Jong-hyun, which were purportedly used as seed money for the conglomerate’s growth.
Chey has challenged the appellate court’s decision, asserting that it incorrectly interpreted the laws regarding peculiar property. He requested the Supreme Court to overturn this decision.
Meanwhile, representatives for Roh Soh-yeong have argued that the appellate court’s ruling was appropriate, maintaining that the assets accumulated during the marriage should be presumed to be co-owned, and hence, subject to division.
The Supreme Court’s decision
on this matter is highly anticipated, as it could set a significant legal precedent for how assets are treated in divorce cases involving complex corporate and personal finances.