[Edaily Reporter Choi Oh-hyun ] A court has ordered Choi Tae-won SK(034730), chairman of SK Group, to pay 944 billion won to Noh So-young, director of the Art Center Navi.

Largest Property Division Amount in South Korea… “One-Third Goes to Noh So-young”

The Family Division 1 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judge Lee Sang-ju) handed down this ruling on the afternoon of the 24th during the sentencing hearing for the retrial of the divorce property division case between Chairman Choi and Director Noh. The court ordered each party to bear their own litigation costs and directed Chairman Choi to pay Ms. Noh late interest at a rate of 5% from the date the judgment becomes final until the date the property division is fully settled. Although this amount is lower than the 1.3808 trillion won awarded in the second-instance ruling, it remains the largest amount ever awarded in a domestic divorce property division case.

Although the court did not disclose the specific rationale for the calculation in open court, it later announced in an explanatory document that the property division ratio would be two-thirds for Chairman Choi and one-third for Ms. Noh. Reflecting the Supreme Court’s remand instructions, the court excluded the 30 billion won in slush funds belonging to former President Roh Tae-woo—Ms. Roh’s father—from the calculation of the division ratio. It also excluded shares gifted by Chairman Choi prior to the breakdown of the marriage for the purpose of maintaining management control and conducting business activities from the assets subject to division. However, Chairman Choi’s SK shares were still recognized as joint property.

The court recognized Chairman Choi’s stock holdings as assets acquired during the marriage, acknowledging that both Chairman Choi and Director Noh contributed to their formation, maintenance, and appreciation in value. It explained, “The value of the stock holdings increased significantly during the marriage due to Chairman Choi’s management activities, and this was facilitated by Director Noh’s contributions to household duties, child-rearing, and external activities related to the SK Group.”

Regarding one of the key issues—the reference date for determining the value of the shares—the court ruled that it should be the date of the conclusion of arguments in the appellate trial prior to the remand, rather than the date of the conclusion of arguments in the retrial. This decision followed existing Supreme Court precedent, which holds that even when property division is heard after a judicial divorce has been finalized, the date of the conclusion of oral arguments in the divorce trial should, in principle, serve as the reference point. However, to ensure a fair distribution of assets in light of the significant rise in SK’s stock price during the remand proceedings, the court opted to reflect this increase in the division ratio rather than in the assessed value of the assets.

Regarding the method of dividing the SK stock assets, the court ruled that, considering factors such as the fact that Chairman Choi’s stock holdings form the basis of the company’s management rights, Chairman Choi must pay the shortfall in the amount Director Noh is entitled to receive in cash.

A legal dispute that has lasted nine years… Choi Tae-won’s side “considering whether to file a further appeal”

Chairman Choi publicly disclosed his extramarital child in 2015 and filed for divorce mediation with Director Noh in 2017. When the mediation broke down, Director Noh filed a counterclaim, seeking not only a divorce but also a substantial amount of alimony and property division, including half of Chairman Choi’s SK shares. Since then, the two sides have engaged in a protracted legal battle over whether Chairman Choi’s SK shares are subject to property division and the extent of Director Noh’s contribution to the group’s growth.

In December 2022, the court of first instance granted the divorce between Chairman Choi and Mrs. Noh, ruling that Chairman Choi must pay Mrs. Noh 100 million won in alimony and 66.5 billion won in property division. At the time, the court determined that Chairman Choi’s SK shares—inherited from his father—constituted separate property and could not be considered jointly acquired assets. However, the court did grant a partial division of assets, taking into account Ms. Noh’s support of his business activities through household management and child-rearing.

In contrast, in May 2024, the appellate court overturned the lower court’s ruling, increasing the alimony to 2 billion won and substantially raising the property division amount to 1.3808 trillion won. In particular, the court ruled that Chairman Choi’s SK shares were also subject to property division, resulting in a division amount approximately 20 times larger than that of the first trial. The court found that, during the SK Group’s growth, 30 billion won provided by former President Roh Tae-woo—Mrs. Roh’s father—served as the foundation for the group’s expansion, and that Mrs. Roh also contributed to the accumulation of assets by supporting management activities as a spouse.

However, the Supreme Court overturned the property division ruling and remanded the case last October. The Supreme Court ruled that the 30 billion won from former President Roh Tae-woo constituted illegal funds raised through so-called “slush funds” and therefore could not be protected under the law. Furthermore, the court held that the 1.1116 trillion won in assets that Chairman Choi had effectively disposed of by making third-party gifts to relatives after the marriage had effectively broken down could not be subject to property division. Accordingly, it remanded the case to the Seoul High Court, instructing it to recalculate the property division ratio. In accordance with the Supreme Court’s remand, the division amount was reduced compared to the amount awarded in the second-instance ruling.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court upheld the second-instance ruling that held Chairman Choi responsible for the breakdown of the marriage and ordered him to pay 2 billion won in alimony; the divorce was also finalized.

Immediately following the ruling, Chairman Choi’s attorney stated, “In the process of dissolving a marriage that lasted nearly 20 years, the divorce was finalized by last year’s Supreme Court ruling, and today’s ruling on the remand for property division was issued. Chairman Choi Tae-won deeply regrets the concern he has caused many people throughout this process,” adding that they would decide whether to file a further appeal after reviewing the ruling. Director Noh’s attorney left the courthouse without responding to questions from the press.