Chey Tae-won’s Side Says “Relieved to See Misunderstandings of Law and Facts Corrected”

On October 16, representatives of SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won stated that they respect the Supreme Court's decision to partially overturn and remand the case in the final appeal of the divorce lawsuit filed by Noh So-young, Director of Art Center Nabi.

Chairman Chey Tae-won of SK and Director Noh So-young of Art Center Nabi attending the divorce lawsuit appeal trial held on the afternoon of April 16 last year at the Seoul High Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Yonhap News

Through his legal counsel, Chairman Chey's side expressed relief that the Supreme Court's ruling corrected several misunderstandings of legal principles and factual errors that had emerged in the appellate trial.

In particular, they emphasized the significance of the Supreme Court's determination that the 30 billion won in slush funds from former President Roh Tae-woo, which had served as the basis for the division of over 1 trillion won in assets in the second trial, was in fact illegal remuneration. Chairman Chey's side stated, "It is especially meaningful that the Supreme Court clearly found it wrong for the appellate court to recognize the claim that 'SK Group grew through illegal slush fund support from former President Roh Tae-woo' as a contribution to marital property. We hope this ruling will dispel speculation and misunderstandings."

In its verdict, the Supreme Court stated, "The act of former President Roh Tae-woo providing part of the bribes he received while in office to the late Chairman Chey Jong-hyun, who was related to him by marriage, constitutes an anti-social, anti-ethical, and immoral act that falls outside the protection of the law." The court further ruled, "Funds given for such illegal reasons constitute illegal remuneration and cannot be considered for restitution or as a contribution in the division of property."

In business circles, some have commented that "this is a case in which the judiciary has clearly delineated the boundary between illegal funds and corporate growth." On the other hand, Director Noh's side is expected to maintain in the retrial at the High Court that "regardless of the illegality of the slush funds, there was a contribution made through joint life during the marriage."