The usual compensation for adultery easily surpassed… Second divorce trial awarded 20 billion KRW in alimony, same amount as Cho Tai-won
“Kim Hee-young’s responsibility, not lighter than Choi Tae-won… No apology or admission of guilt”,
Chairman Choi Tae-won of SK Group (left) and art center Nabi’s director No So-young. 2024.4.16/News1 ⓒ News1 Journalist Park Ji-hye,
,
, ‘(Seoul=News1) Reporter Seo Han-Sam = The court has ordered Kim Hee-young, a director of T&C Foundation, to pay 20 billion KRW in alimony, interpreting it as holding her responsible for the breakdown of marriage equally with Chairman Choi Tae-won of SK Group. In particular, the 20 billion KRW in alimony is the highest amount in adultery lawsuits, leading to various interpretations.’,
,
, ‘The Seoul Family Court Division 4 (Chief Judge Lee Kwang-woo) ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by No So-young, the girlfriend of Chairman Choi, against Kim, ordering the payment of 20 billion KRW jointly with Chairman Choi. The court cited two-thirds of the 30 billion KRW claimed by No.’,
,
, ‘This is the same amount as the alimony awarded to Chairman Choi in the divorce appeal case with No. The court deviated from previous precedents and followed the result of the second divorce trial.’,
,
, ‘The usual compensation amount for adultery ranges from 20 to 30 million KRW. It can go up to 50 million KRW at most, and the ratio of alimony between spouse and adulterer is typically set at a 2:1 level. The 20 billion KRW in alimony awarded to Kim far exceeds this level.’,
,
, ‘The recognition of a large sum of alimony is explained by the court’s judgment that Kim’s responsibility for the breakdown of marriage is heavy.’,
,
, ‘Explaining the key points of the ruling, the court considered the breakdown of the marriage, misconduct, and severity to calculate the compensation amount.’,
,
, ‘The court pointed out, “Since the early 2009s, Kim and Chairman Choi have maintained an illicit relationship, given birth to a child out of wedlock, and behaved in a way similar to that of a married couple.” The court also noted, “Rather than sincerely apologizing to No in the divorce trial or admitting their mistakes, both claim that the responsibility for the breakdown of marriage lies with No.”‘,
,
, ‘The court added, “Compensation for the mental shock suffered by No should be provided, and neglectful treatment of the spouse and property loss due to misconduct should be considered in determining the compensation amount.”‘,
,
, ‘In this case, the court judged that Kim’s responsibility for misconduct is as heavy as Chairman Choi’s.’,
,
, ‘The court explained, “Considering the misconduct, duration, severity, and the marital life between No and Chairman Choi, it is difficult to see Kim’s responsibility as significantly lighter compared to Chairman Choi’s, so it is decided that she should bear an alimony amount equal to that of Chairman Choi.”‘,
,
, ‘The alimony awarded to Chairman Choi in the divorce appeal trial with No was also very unusual according to legal circles. The appellate court set the alimony at 20 billion KRW, twenty times the 1 billion KRW originally awarded in the first trial.’,
,
, ‘At that time, the appellate court heavily criticized Chairman Choi, stating, “Even though the marriage relationship had not been dissolved, he established a foundation with Kim and continued public activities, behaving as if in a position similar to a spouse.” The court sharply increased the alimony amount, citing a significant duration of misconduct and a failure to respect the purity of marriage and monogamy principles.’,
,
, ‘(End)’