Hello, this is attorney Kwang-sik Kim of Cheongchul Law Firm.

“I bought this apartment before we got married.” “This land was handed down from my father, so why should I share it?” These are among the questions we hear most often in divorce consultations. The Civil Act treats property owned before marriage, or acquired during marriage by inheritance or gift, as “separate property” (특유재산) and in principle excludes it from property division. In actual divorce litigation, however, courts quite often order that even such property be partly divided.

Recent analysis suggests this trend is becoming more pronounced. On October 18, 2026, the Financial News reported that courts are broadly recognizing not only housework and child-rearing but also indirect contributions, such as a spouse’s domestic labor making it possible to pay loan interest and cut living costs so that assets could be preserved, and that cases in which premarital apartments or inherited land become subject to division are increasing. The first-instance ruling in September 2026 in the divorce suit of Smilegate founder and CVO Kwon Hyuk-bin, in which the court gave broad consideration to the spouse’s indirect contributions, is also cited as part of this trend (although that case concerned shares in a company founded during the marriage).

Today we will look at what separate property is and when it becomes subject to division, what requirements the Supreme Court precedents impose, how inherited land and premarital apartments are actually assessed, and what you should prepare in order to protect your separate property.

[Question]

I bought an apartment with a mortgage before marriage, and after marriage I inherited a commercial building from my father. After 15 years of marriage we are heading for divorce, and my wife says both assets must be divided. They are in my name and were acquired with my own money. Do I still have to divide them?

[Answer]

1. What Is Separate Property — Assets That in Principle Are Not Divided

Article 830(1) of the Civil Act (민법 제830조 제1항) provides that property a spouse owned before marriage and property acquired in his or her own name during marriage is that spouse’s separate property, and Article 831 (민법 제831조) provides that each spouse manages, uses and takes the profits of his or her separate property. Because property division is a system for settling the assets the spouses built together during the marriage, property obtained without the other spouse’s cooperation, such as assets prepared before marriage or inherited or received as gifts from parents, is in principle not subject to division.

In property division upon divorce, however, substance matters more than title. Property acquired with the couple’s income during the marriage is regarded as jointly built property and is subject to division even if it is held in one spouse’s name. Therefore, to exclude a particular asset from division, you must prove with documents that it was owned before marriage or acquired by inheritance or gift. Even when its origin is proven, the asset may again become subject to division if the other spouse cooperated in preserving or increasing it, and that cooperation must be asserted by the party seeking division. Note that Article 830(2) of the Civil Act (민법 제830조 제2항) presumes property whose ownership as between the spouses is unclear to be jointly owned, so once the origin can no longer be traced, the party claiming separate property is at a disadvantage.

▶ Card News Summary Premarital property and property acquired by inheritance or gift is “separate property” and in principle is not subject to division. Title alone is not enough, however; you must prove its origin, namely that it was premarital property or was inherited or received as a gift.

2. The Exception — Division When the Other Spouse Helped Preserve or Grow the Asset

The Supreme Court has held that “a spouse’s separate property is in principle not subject to division, but even separate property may be subject to division where the other spouse is found to have actively cooperated in preserving it so as to prevent its decrease, or to have cooperated in increasing it” (Supreme Court Decision 97Meu1486, 1493, February 13, 1998 (대법원 1998. 2. 13. 선고 97므1486, 1493 판결)). In that case, the Supreme Court treated land the husband had inherited from his grandmother as subject to division, on the ground that after the husband collapsed, the wife earned the family’s living expenses by running a jewelry shop and doing wallpapering work, thereby keeping the property from being sold off. This precedent remains the basic standard for dividing separate property to this day.

Housework also counts as cooperation. The Supreme Court held that even inherited property, or real estate formed on the basis of it, is subject to division if the other spouse’s housework or similar efforts contributed directly or indirectly to its acquisition and maintenance (Supreme Court Decision 96Meu1434, April 10, 1998 (대법원 1998. 4. 10. 선고 96므1434 판결)), and that the same applies to property received as a gift from a third party (Supreme Court Order 2008Seu111, June 9, 2009 (대법원 2009. 6. 9.자 2008스111 결정)). In practice, typical examples of cooperation also include repaying a loan attached to the asset with the couple’s income during the marriage, remodeling or extending it with joint funds, and the other spouse helping with rental management or business operations. The longer the marriage, the more such contributions accumulate, and the scope of recognition tends to widen.

▶ Card News Summary Supreme Court Decision 97Meu1486: if the other spouse cooperated in preserving separate property so as to prevent its decrease, or in increasing it, the property becomes subject to division. Inherited or gifted property can also be divided where there is a housework contribution, and in practice loan repayment, remodeling and rental management are typical examples.

3. Recent Trends — The Scope of Contribution Is Expanding

Recently, courts have tended not to limit contribution to direct financial input. Although not a separate-property case, the first-instance ruling in the case of Kwon Hyuk-bin, CVO, which divided shares in a company founded during the marriage (Seoul Family Court, decided September 9, 2026), is a representative example. The court assessed the contribution to the formation of the assets at 65% for Mr. Kwon and 35% for his spouse, and ordered division of 35% of the Smilegate shares plus KRW 65 billion in cash. The grounds were reported to include that the spouse had held shares in the early days of the start-up and had been registered as a representative director, had been responsible for housework and child-rearing for a long period, and that the spouse’s family had provided financial support early in the marriage. Both sides have appealed, and the matter will be contested again on appeal.

In the divorce suit between SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won and Director Roh So-young, Chairman Chey likewise argued that his SK shares were separate property acquired with money given to him by his father. The first-instance court accepted this, but the appellate court and the court on remand held that Director Roh’s housework, child-rearing and external activities during the marriage had contributed to the formation and maintenance of the shares’ value, and included them in the property to be divided. The Supreme Court left that determination intact. Thus, in cases involving high-net-worth individuals, it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep assets out of division merely by asserting that they were “inherited” or “owned before the marriage.” Note, however, that such determinations vary greatly from case to case depending on the length of the marriage, the nature of the assets and the specific contributions made.

▶ Card News Summary In dividing the shares of a company founded during the marriage, the Kwon Hyuk-bin first-instance ruling counted housework and child-rearing, early participation in the start-up, and support from the spouse’s family as contributions. In the Chey Tae-won case, too, shares bought with gifted money were included in the property to be divided.

4. Inherited Land and Premarital Apartments — What Courts Look At

Even an apartment bought before marriage is likely to be included in the property to be divided, or at least to have a substantial part of the repayments taken into account, if the loan was repaid with the couple’s income after marriage. The specific way this is reflected, such as whether to include the entire asset and adjust through contribution ratios, differs from case to case. If the apartment was sold and the proceeds were combined with the couple’s savings to buy a new home, the new home is likely to be assessed as a mixture of separate and joint property. Conversely, if the apartment was acquired without a loan, no significant expenses were incurred during the marriage, and its value rose solely through market appreciation, there is room for it to be excluded from division or for the contribution to be assessed as low.

The same applies to inherited land or buildings. Land held as is immediately after inheritance is readily recognized as separate property, but it may be found subject to division if the other spouse handled its rental management, if property taxes, maintenance fees or repair costs were paid from the couple’s funds, or if inherited money was mixed into the joint household account so that its origin can no longer be distinguished. The Supreme Court likewise upheld a lower court ruling that declined to recognize separate property where money given by the father had been used as purchase funds for the couple’s joint property (2008Seu111 (2008스111)). Ultimately, the key is whether you can show with evidence “when and with what money the asset was acquired, and who put in what expenses and efforts during the marriage.”

▶ Card News Summary Even a premarital apartment can be divided if the loan was repaid with joint income during the marriage, and inherited property can become subject to division if it was mixed with joint funds or managed by the other spouse.

5. Protecting Your Separate Property — Records of the Source of Funds and a Marital Property Agreement

First, keep records of how the asset was acquired and where the funds came from. You should retain the premarital sale contract and payment records, the inheritance division agreement and inheritance tax return, and the gift contract and gift tax filing. Second, it is advisable to manage inherited money and rental income from separate property in a separate account so that it is not mixed with joint living expenses. Once mixed, the source is extremely difficult to distinguish. Third, bear in mind that whether loans or expenses relating to separate property are paid from the couple’s joint funds will affect any later division.

Fourth, if you are not yet married, you may consider a marital property agreement (the so-called prenuptial agreement) under Article 829 of the Civil Act (민법 제829조). This is a system for determining the ownership and management of property before the marriage is formed; during the marriage it may be changed only with court permission where there is a legitimate reason, and to assert it against third parties it must be registered by the time the marriage is registered. However, the Supreme Court has held that waiving in advance, before the dissolution of the marriage, a claim for property division that has not yet been concretized is not permissible by its nature (Supreme Court Order 2015Seu451, January 25, 2016 (대법원 2016. 1. 25.자 2015스451 결정)), so a prenuptial agreement that waives the property division claim itself may not be recognized as effective. The agreement should therefore be designed to confirm which assets are whose separate property and to set out how they will be managed.

▶ Card News Summary Keep acquisition and inheritance records, manage separate property in a separate account, be careful about putting in joint funds, and if you are not yet married, consider a marital property agreement (Civil Act Article 829 (민법 제829조)). Note, however, that an advance waiver of the property division claim may be ineffective.

Separate property is “property that in principle is not divided,” but once the other spouse’s cooperation is added over the course of the marriage, that boundary blurs more easily than one might think. Whether you are the party who must share the assets or the party trying to protect them, the outcome ultimately depends on how concretely you can document the circumstances of acquisition and the contributions made during the marriage.

Cheongchul Law Firm provides legal advice on divorce and property division, from pursuing and defending property division claims in high-net-worth divorces, to disputes over whether inherited or gifted assets and unlisted shares qualify as separate property and over contribution ratios, to designing marital property agreements (prenuptial agreements). Please feel free to contact us if you need advice on these matters.