South Korea's Supreme Court overturned a record 1.38 trillion won ($973 million) divorce award to Roh Soh-yeong in 2024 and sent the SK Group chairman's case back to Seoul High Court for retrial, according to Bloomberg. For California residents, the case spotlights the single hardest question in any high-asset divorce: when do a founder's business shares become divisible marital property?
Key Facts
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| What happened | Korea's Supreme Court overturned a record 1.38 trillion won ($973M) asset-division award and remanded the case for retrial |
| When | Supreme Court ruling issued 2024; retrial resumed at Seoul High Court in June 2026 |
| Where | Seoul High Court, South Korea |
| Who's affected | SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won and estranged wife Roh Soh-yeong |
| Core legal issue | Whether Chey's SK Inc. shares are marital property, and treatment of a disputed slush fund |
| Practical impact | Control of the entire SK conglomerate — Korea's second-largest — hinges on the retrial |
Why this matters legally
The classification of business stock as marital versus separate property is the decisive issue in nearly every high-net-worth divorce, and the SK case proves it operates the same way across legal systems. Korea's Supreme Court did not reduce the award because $973 million was too large — it remanded because the lower court's method for deciding whether Chey's SK Inc. shares counted as divisible property was legally flawed, according to Bloomberg's June 2026 reporting.
That distinction matters. When an appellate court reverses on classification grounds rather than valuation, the entire property division restarts. In a company-founder divorce, the difference between shares being 100% divisible and 0% divisible can swing the outcome by hundreds of millions of dollars. The same dividing line — marital effort versus pre-marriage or gifted ownership — sits at the center of California's community property system.
How California law handles this
California divides community property equally, 50/50, under Cal. Fam. Code § 760, which defines community property as all property acquired by a married person during the marriage. Property owned before marriage, or received by gift or inheritance, is separate property under Cal. Fam. Code § 770 and is not divided. California is one of nine community property states, a framework distinct from the equitable-distribution approach used in New York, Florida, and Texas.
Business shares complicate this clean line. If a founder owned stock before marriage but the company grew during the marriage through the spouse's labor, California treats part of that increase as community property. Courts apply one of two apportionment formulas from case law — Pereira (favoring the community when growth came from the owner's effort) or Van Camp (favoring separate property when growth came from the business's own capital). Under Cal. Fam. Code § 2550, the court must divide the community estate equally, making the apportionment calculation the entire ballgame in a case like Chey's.
Transparency obligations also mirror the SK dispute over hidden or contested assets. California requires both spouses to exchange a full preliminary declaration of disclosure under Cal. Fam. Code § 2104, listing every asset and debt. Deliberately concealing assets carries severe consequences: in the well-known Marriage of Rossi decision, a wife who hid a $1.3 million lottery win was ordered to forfeit 100% of it. The Chey retrial's fight over a disputed slush fund is, in California terms, a full financial disclosure problem — exactly the kind of dispute § 2104 is designed to surface before trial.
Practical takeaways
For California residents facing a divorce involving a business, closely held stock, or significant assets, the SK case offers concrete lessons:
-
Document what you owned before marriage. Separate property under Cal. Fam. Code § 770 stays yours only if you can trace it. Gather pre-marriage account statements, stock certificates, and gift or inheritance records now — reconstruction after filing is far harder.
-
Understand that business growth during marriage is often shared. Even if you founded a company before the wedding, appreciation driven by your work during the marriage can be community property. A forensic accountant applies the Pereira or Van Camp formula to quantify that share.
-
Complete your disclosure honestly and completely. Cal. Fam. Code § 2104 requires listing every asset. Concealment can cost you the entire hidden asset, as Marriage of Rossi established.
-
Get a professional valuation early. Stock and business interests must be valued as of a specific date. Learn how the California divorce process sequences valuation and disclosure so you are not caught flat-footed.
-
Estimate your exposure before negotiating. Our California divorce cost estimator and a personalized divorce roadmap help you understand what a contested high-asset case involves before you commit to litigation.
The SK retrial will take months and turns on Korean law, not California's. But the underlying question — how the law separates a founder's personal empire from the marital estate — is universal. In California, that question is answered by the community property rules of the Family Code, and the answer very often depends on the quality of the records and disclosures each spouse brings to the table.
If you are navigating a divorce that involves a business, professional practice, or substantial investments, the classification and valuation issues raised by the SK case apply to you at any scale. A qualified California family law attorney can trace your separate property, apportion business growth correctly, and protect you against disclosure disputes. You can find a California divorce attorney to discuss your specific situation.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.