Kim Hee-young, director of the T&C Foundation and cohabitant of SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won, deposited the 2 billion won in damages that the court ordered her to pay to No So-young, director of the Art Center Nabi, into No’s account on the 26th.
No’s legal representative responded by expressing suspicion that Kim’s unilateral transfer might stem from the mistress’s perception that “just giving money to Director No is enough.” They also demanded an explanation of how Kim came to know No’s account number.
Park Jong-woo, lawyer at Law Firm Raum and representative of Kim’s side, stated that Kim sent 2 billion won to No’s personal account that afternoon.
Park said, “Director Kim publicly expressed her apology to Director No So-young and her children immediately after the first trial ruling on the damages lawsuit on the 22nd, and declared her intention not to appeal the ruling and to promptly comply with it. Accordingly, Director Kim fully repaid the principal and interest of the judgment by directly transferring the amount to Director No So-young’s account today, and immediately informed Director No’s legal representative of this fact through her own legal counsel.”
Park also said, “Right after transferring the principal and interest of the judgment today, Director Kim submitted a waiver of appeal for the first trial ruling to the court. The transfer of the principal and interest is not an advance payment based on an appeal, but a definitive debt repayment made in continuation of her previous statement respecting and complying with the ruling.”
The transfer of the principal and interest by Kim’s side was made four days after the Seoul Family Court Family Division 4 (Chief Judge Lee Kwang-woo), which handled the first trial of the damages claim filed by Director No against Kim on the 22nd, ruled that “Director Kim and Chairman Chey shall jointly pay 2 billion won to Director No.”
At that time, the court recognized that “the defendants’ (Kim and Chairman Chey’s) misconduct, birth of an extramarital child, Chairman Chey’s unilateral departure from home, and continued separation fundamentally damaged the trust between Director No and Chairman Chey and led to the breakdown of their marriage, obliging them to pay damages.”
Furthermore, the appellate court in the divorce case ruled that Kim should also bear the 2 billion won in damages that Chairman Chey was ordered to pay to Director No.
On the day of the ruling, Kim’s side stated, “We once again apologize to Director No So-young” and announced that they would not appeal.
With Kim’s full payment of the damages on this day, regardless of the outcome of the Supreme Court’s ongoing appeal trial of the divorce case between Chairman Chey and Director No, Director No has secured the 2 billion won in damages.
The damages claim lawsuit filed by Director No against Kim is related to but separate from the divorce case, so each ruling holds independent effect once finalized.
For example, even if the Supreme Court overturns the second trial ruling in the divorce appeal and finalizes a ruling setting damages lower than 2 billion won, Director No is not obligated to return the damages confirmed through the separate lawsuit.
Since Director Kim, who shares the burden of damages with Chairman Chey, has already made the payment, Chairman Chey does not have to pay damages separately to Director No. However, if the divorce case finalizes damages exceeding 2 billion won, Chairman Chey must bear the remaining amount after deducting 2 billion won.
Meanwhile, No’s legal representative Lee Sang-won said, “The mistress’s side unilaterally deposited what appears to be the judgment amount into plaintiff No So-young’s account today without any prior consultation or notice,” adding, “We do not even know whether the money is a debt repayment or an advance payment.”
Lee added, “This unilateral transfer by the defendant’s side raises suspicion that the mistress’s side thinks it is enough to just give money to plaintiff No So-young. Also, we want to point out the need for an explanation on how the mistress’s side came to know the account number information, which is personal or financial information of plaintiff No So-young.”
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
