1. The Client’s Crisis

The client had lived with her husband for about 23 years. For a long time, she had supported the family while balancing work and housework. But at some point, her husband’s pathological jealousy began to worsen seriously.

The husband, without any basis, suspected that the client was having an improper relationship with a man connected to her work. It did not stop at mere suspicion. He hired a private investigation agency to tail the client and continued making unfair allegations based on photos and conversations collected unlawfully. Eventually, he even secretly attached a tracking device to the client’s and the other man’s vehicles. Once this came to light, a police report was filed, and the case is now under investigation by the prosecution.

Under the husband’s surveillance and harassment, the client developed severe depression and anxiety and had to receive regular psychiatric treatment. With excessive interference from her mother-in-law, housework and child-rearing having been shifted entirely onto the client, and signs of emotional abuse toward the children as well, she concluded that the marriage could no longer be maintained and filed for divorce.

The problem was that a lawsuit alone was not enough. The husband was not complying with the court’s order to disclose assets, and there was a real possibility that he would hide or dispose of the only real estate in order to gain an advantage in property division. Even if she won the merits case, if there were no assets left to enforce against, her rights would ultimately become empty in practice.

2. Key Issues

The issues that needed to be resolved in this case were as follows.

First, it was necessary to determine how to calculate the secured claim that combined alimony and property division. Based on the husband’s fault and the length of the marriage, it was necessary to calculate the alimony, as well as the property division ratio reflecting the client’s contribution over the approximately 23-year marriage, in order to establish the basis for the amount claimed in the provisional attachment.

The need for preservation was also an important issue. It had to be convincingly explained to the court that the husband was ignoring the court’s order to disclose assets and that there was a concrete risk that he would dispose of the only real estate during the litigation. A provisional attachment is a powerful measure that restricts the other party’s disposition of property before a final judgment, so it is granted only when the necessity is specifically demonstrated.

3. Jonjae’s Strategy

Managing attorney Noh Jong-eon, attorney Park Jeong-eun, and attorney Oh Do-gyeong handled the divorce merits case and the provisional attachment request as a single coordinated strategy.

Alimony was claimed in the amount of KRW 30 million, taking into account the husband’s fault and the emotional harm suffered by the client. The husband’s pathological jealousy was not merely distrust; it escalated into concrete harmful acts such as hiring a private investigator and attaching a tracking device, and we substantiated with medical records that the client was receiving treatment for severe depression and anxiety as a result. Since the tracking-device incident had already been reported to the police and was under prosecution investigation, the existence of the criminal proceedings itself served as objective evidence supporting the husband’s fault.

In the property division, after calculating the couple’s total net assets, we argued for the client’s contribution rate to be 50%. Based on the long marriage of about 23 years and the client’s continued work and dedication to housework during that time, we calculated a property division amount of about KRW 61 million. Combined with alimony of KRW 30 million, the secured claim for the provisional attachment came to about KRW 91 million.

In explaining the need for preservation, we emphasized that the husband was not complying with the court’s asset disclosure order and that the real estate subject to attachment was the only identifiable asset in his name. We specifically explained that if the property were disposed of while waiting for the merits case to conclude, the client’s rights would become practically meaningless.

In response to the court’s order to provide security, we promptly submitted a performance guarantee trust agreement (guarantee insurance policy) so that the procedure would not be delayed.

4. Results and Recovery

The court found the client’s request to be well-founded and decided to place a provisional attachment on the husband’s apartment. While the divorce merits case continues, the husband is legally prevented from disposing of or using that property as collateral.

As a result, the client secured a practical basis for enforcement if she prevails in the merits case. In a situation where the family she had protected for 23 years was broken apart by the husband’s pathological jealousy and illegal surveillance, proceeding with both the divorce process and the debt-preservation procedure ensured that her rights would not remain merely a judgment on paper.

In divorce litigation, it is not uncommon for the opposing party to hide assets while you are focused only on the merits, leaving nothing to collect in the end. Preservative measures, including provisional attachment, should be reviewed together as essential elements of the divorce process. If you are wondering how to respond in a similar situation, we recommend consulting a professional, as the outcome may vary depending on the specific facts of the case.

Attorneys in charge: Noh Jong-eon, Managing Attorney · Park Jeong-eun, Attorney · Oh Do-gyeong, Attorney

This case has been partially de-identified to protect confidentiality, within a scope that does not undermine the substance of the matter.

Watch the video on Law Firm Jonjae’s YouTube channel, "Family Law Unboxing"