Rebuttal to Divorce Appeal Court Explanation Material
"Extend the established period to 2024 until 2009"
Request for clarification on marriage duration too
Choi Tae-won, chairman of SK Group, and No So-young, director of Art Center Nabi, have had Choi's legal team immediately demand clarification regarding the explanatory materials released on the 18th about the appellate court's decision on their divorce lawsuit.
Choi's legal team stated that "while the original judgment set the comparison period for the stock appreciation contribution between the late chairman Choi Jong-hyun and Chairman Choi from the acquisition of Daehan Telecom shares in 1994 to the stock listing in 2009, the explanatory materials extended Chairman Choi's contribution period until April 2024," adding, "If the appellate court intends to maintain this logic, we wonder whether it will issue an additional ruling to extend the comparison period in the judgment until 2024."
SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won is speaking about his position on the appeal trial of the divorce lawsuit with No So-young, director of the Art Navi Center, at the SK Seorin Building in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on the morning of the 17th. [Photo by Yonhap News]
On the 17th, Choi's side held a press conference pointing out that the value of Daehan Telecom (now SK C&C) shares in May 1998 was calculated as 100 won per share instead of 1,000 won. The appellate court ruled that the contributions of the late chairman and Chairman Choi were 12 times and 355 times respectively, but in reality, they argued it should be 125 times and 35.5 times. Choi's side claimed that the stock value, a key issue in the ruling, was miscalculated, leading to an excessive assessment of No's contribution as a supportive spouse.
Immediately after the press conference, the court decided to amend the judgment and corrected the errors pointed out by Choi's side. In the explanatory materials, the court stated, "The correction of the judgment addresses calculation errors related to the 'intermediate stage' facts concerning the continuous management activities from the plaintiff's father (late chairman Choi) to the plaintiff (Chairman Choi), who jointly contributed to the formation of assets under Chairman Choi's name," and added, "This does not substantially affect the specific property division ratios."
Furthermore, the court said, "To compare the stock value appreciation contributions claimed by Chairman Choi's side, the comparison should be 125:160 rather than 125:35.5." It is unusual for the court to release explanatory materials and issue a statement after amending the judgment.
However, Choi's side argued that the court's position in the judgment and the explanatory materials are inconsistent. Previously, the contribution period of the late chairman was analyzed as a 125-fold increase from November 1994 to May 1998, and Chairman Choi's contribution period was considered as a 35.6-fold increase until the stock listing in 2009. But in the recent explanatory materials, Chairman Choi's contribution period was extended to 26 years until April 2024, with a 160-fold increase, which they argue should also be subject to additional amendment.
Choi's legal team questioned, "Although the basis was changed from 12.5:355 before the error to 125:160, we doubt whether this has no impact on the judgment," and also raised the question, "The court previously stated that the actual marital relationship broke down in 2019, so we are curious why the contribution was recalculated extending to 2024."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
