1. The Client's Crisis

The client married his spouse in 2004 and had two children, including one who had reached adulthood. As conflicts deepened over the course of their long marriage, the client filed for divorce in 2021, and the other party filed a counterclaim in July 2022 seeking division of property. The trial court ruled that the client must pay 545 million won to the other party as property division. Because most of the property owned by the client had been inherited from his father, he felt that such a large property division award was unfair and decided to appeal.

2. Key Issues

There were two main issues to be contested in this case. First, most of the client's assets were his separate property inherited from his father, so the issue was whether it was proper to include them in the scope of property division. Only four years had passed since the inheritance, making it difficult to say that the other party had contributed to the formation of those assets. Second, even if the separate property were included in the division, the issue was whether the 60:40 division ratio recognized at first instance was appropriate, or whether the ratio should be adjusted in light of the other party's actual contribution.

3. Jonjae's Strategy

The divorce team led by Managing Attorney Yoon Ji-sang developed a strategy to highlight in the appellate court the nature of the client's inherited assets as separate property.

First, we made it clear that most of the client's assets were inherited from his father and were separate property, not property jointly formed by the couple. In particular, we emphasized that only four years had passed since the inheritance, demonstrating that the period during which the other party could have materially contributed to the formation or increase of those assets was very short.

We further substantiated through specific facts that the other party had not cooperated in maintaining or preventing the decrease of the separate property. Drawing on the experience of Managing Attorney Yoon Ji-sang, a former chief judge at the family court, we accurately identified the standards the panel uses when assessing the nature of separate property and the degree of contribution in setting the property division ratio, and used that understanding to draft the appellate brief and preparatory submissions.

4. Result and Recovery

The appellate court acknowledged that the other party had contributed to some extent to the maintenance and prevention of decrease in the separate property, and therefore included the separate property itself in the scope of division. However, the arguments presented by Law Firm Jonjae were reflected in the court's determination of the property division ratio, and the first-instance 60:40 ratio was changed to 70:30. As a result, the property division amount the other party was to receive was reduced by 110 million won. The client was able to prevent the inherited assets from his father from being excessively divided and resolve the case at a more reasonable ratio.

Responsible Attorney: Yoon Ji-sang, Managing Attorney · Divorce Team

For confidentiality, this case has been partially de-identified to the extent that it does not undermine the substance of the matter.