Korea Divorce Law

Local Court Respects Divorce Filing in US
By Na Jeong-ju
Staff Reporter, Korea Times
08-25-2004

A Seoul court Wednesday turned down a petition by a man to lift an injunction against his property in relation to his divorce case, saying it will respect the wife's divorce filing in a foreign court.

Court officials said it is the first time a Korean court has decided to recognize the validity of a lawsuit, which was filed with a court in other countries by Korean nationals.

The wife filed for divorce last December with a county court in Virginia, the United States. At the start of divorce proceedings, the wife also filed a petition for property division. According to her lawyers, she filed the suit in the U.S., not in Korea, because U.S. courts usually make rulings more favorable to wives in divorce cases.

While the two individuals concerned are both Korean nationals, they have resided in both the U.S. and Korea and have properties in both countries.

After filing for divorce in the U.S., the wife also submitted a petition with the Seoul Family Court to temporarily freeze 7.9 billion won of her husband's property in Korea.

The Korean court accepted the petition, leaving the husband, identified as Ahn, unable to exercise his property rights until a ruling is made by the U.S. court.

As proceedings in the U.S. court dragged on, the husband filed a petition with the Seoul Family Court to lift the freeze on his property. However, the family court said it is unable to handle his divorce case because it is already under the review of the U.S. court.

The court's decision means the South Korean court may be dependent on a ruling by a foreign court if it is more effective in protecting the basic rights of Korean nationals.

Judge Jin Hyun-min of the Seoul Family Court said the wife filed a suit with a foreign court for her interests, and the court should respect her decision. Although she and her husband are both Koreans, a local court cannot make a judgment on her case because she wants her case to be dealt with by a foreign court, Jin said.

KOREAN RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCE JUDGMENTS

By JEREMY D. MORLEY*

The Korean Statutory Standards for Recognition

Article 203 of the Korean Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows (Choe, p. 1153):
A final foreign judgment shall be valid and enforceable only if it satisfies the following conditions:
1. The jurisdiction of the foreign court of judgment is not denied by any law, or treaty;
2. if the losing defendant is Korean, he received service of summons or other orders necessary for the commencement of the action other than by public notice, or he made an appearance without receiving service thereof;
3. the foreign judgment is not contrary to the public policy or good morals of Korea; and
4. reciprocity is secured between Korea and that foreign country.

Two other provisions of the Korean Code of Civil Procedure are also of significance to enforcement:

Article 476 provides:
1. Enforcement based on the judgment of a foreign court may be carried out only when the admissibility thereof is pronounced by way of a judgment of enforcement rendered by the Korean court.
2. In regard to a suit demanding a judgment of enforcement, the District Court of the place where the general forum of a debtor exists shall have jurisdiction, and in case no general forum exists, the court having the jurisdiction over the action against the debtor in conformity with provisions of Article 9 shall have jurisdiction.

Article 477 provides:
1. A judgment of enforcement shall be rendered without inquiring into the merits of the decision.
2. A suit demanding a judgment of enforcement shall be dismissed in the following cases:
(i) When it is not certified that the judgment of a foreign court has become irrevocable;
(ii) When the foreign judgment does not fulfill the conditions prescribed in Article 203.

The effect of the three statutory provisions is to provide several distinct requirements that must be satisfied if a foreign judgment is to be enforced in Korea:

1. The requirement of finality and conclusiveness
Interim awards are not the subject of enforcement proceedings in Korea. (Choe, p. 1154). Foreign temporary dispositions are not recognizable because of their nature as provisional remedies. (Kim, p. 7).
A foreign judgment will be considered a final judgment only if there exists no possibility of a future appeal. (Choe, p. 1154). The party seeking to enforce a foreign judgment must prove either that an appeal is not possible or that the time for an appeal has passed. (Choe, p. 1154). California counsel should advise as to whether or not these conditions have been fulfilled.
An order for pre-judgment attachment and an order for pre-judgment injunction are examples of non-final judgments. Similarly, even if a foreign judgment which is permitted provisional enforcement pending an appeal is enforceable in the concerned jurisdiction, it cannot be a subject of recognition in Korea so long as it is not final. (Chung, p. 68).

2. The issue of the location of the subject-matter

The in personam and in rem concepts are alien to Korean jurisprudence. (Choe, p. 1154). Generally, a foreign judgment in rem would be recognized and/ or enforced in Korea when the judgment concerns immovable or movable property that was within the jurisdiction of the foreign court at the time of the proceeding. (Choe, p. 1155).

3. The jurisdiction of the foreign court

It is clear that a Korean court will not enforce a judgment of a foreign court concerning a dispute that is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Korea or a third country. For example, in an action concerning rights in Korean real estate Korean courts have exclusive jurisdiction. (Choe, p. 1155).
This will apply to movables located in Korea. (Kim, p. 8).

4. Public policy

Public policy or good morals in Section 203 are judged by Korean standards. (Choe, p. 1157).
The requirement has a broad meaning, which may range from substantive contents of the foreign judgment to procedural fundamentals. (Choe, p. 1157).
The reasons leading to the conclusion as well as the conclusion of the foreign judgment itself should be examined in deciding whether or not the content of the foreign judgment is contrary to public policy or good morals. (Choe, p. 1157).
A judgment ordering payment of support money should be recognized at least in cases involving foreigners, even if it based on polygamy, in view of the fact that the violation of the principle of monogamy is merely indirect. (Choe, p. 1157).
Public policy means the fundamental principles or ideology of Koreas national legal order and the general sense of morality prevailing in Korean society. The compatibility of a foreign judgment with public policy should be determined by comparing the personal and public interests that might be promoted by recognizing a foreign judgment with the possibility that the national legal order or social ethics may be infringed thereby. (Kim, p. 14).
A foreign judgment, the substance of which is not compatible with fundamental principles of Korean law, cannot be recognized in Korea. In determining compatibility with public policy, the factual basis of a judgment, as well as its text, must be taken into consideration. Thus, even a monetary judgment may be held in violation of Korean public policy if the factual basis of such judgment is so illegal or repugnant that the assistance of the Korean courts in implementing the judgment is deemed unacceptable in light of Korean legal philosophy. For example, a judgment ordering the defendant to deliver contraband goods, or a judgment confirming the legality of a concubine is not recognizable in Korea. (Kim, p. 15).
Article 17(1) of the Korean Conflict of Laws Act provides that The matrimonial property system shall be governed by the lex patriae of the husband at the time of the marriage.
Article 18 of the Korean Conflict of Laws Act provides that Divorce shall be governed by the lex patriae of the husband at the time of the occurrence of the causal facts: Provided that the court may not adjudicate a divorce if the causal facts do not constitute the chief causes for a divorce under the Acts of the Republic of Korea.
Article 23 of the Korean Conflict of Laws Act provides that The duty to support shall be governed by the lex patriae of the person liable to support.
Article 840 of the Korean Civil Act sets forth the bases for a judicial divorce, which are 1. act of unchastity, 2. malicious desertion. 3  4. extreme maltreatment, 5. death or life of the spouse is unknown for three years and 6. any other serious cause for making it difficult to continue the marriage. There is no provision for a no-fault divorce (except for a divorce by agreement between the parties).
The Korean judicial divorce is premised on the fault-based system of a contest between a wrongdoer and the wronged. The courts reason that a guiltless spouse should not be forced into unwanted divorce. Korean legal scholars supporting the fault-based system generally cite the following reasons: Granting divorce to the party at fault goes against the Confucian morality (doei), and it may encourage the husband to arbitrarily abandon his wife, as was the practice in the past. Moreover, by forcing a couple to stay in marriage, it is believed that a wife will be able to continue to use the common property and receive support. (Lee, p. 492).
The standards that govern divorce and child custody in Korea are extremely subjective and the judges are vested with great discretion. The standards are very flexible. (Lee, p. 493). In the Korean system, the judge is intended to be a parent to the public, who is benevolent, lenient and wise (Lee, p. 489).

5. Reciprocity

It is not necessary that a Korean judgment has been recognized in practice if it is predictable that a Korean judgment will be recognized in light of statutes and legal theories in the foreign country. (Choe, p. 1157).
The conditions of recognition do not have to be identical in Korea and the foreign country. A substantial similarity in important points of the respective requirements should be considered sufficient. (Choe, p. 1157).
The term reciprocity in Section 203 means that the particular foreign country does not inquire into the merits of a Korean judgment by reason of a treaty or its domestic law, and that such foreign country would recognize the validity of a Korean judgment under a standard similar to or more lenient than that of Article 203. (Choe, p. 1158).
Reciprocity means that as the Korean courts recognize judgments of foreign courts, so should the foreign courts recognize Korean judgments. Reciprocity purports to prevent inequitable treatment of Korean judgments by foreign courts. (Chung, p. 70).
Several scholars construe reciprocity to mean that the foreign equivalent of Art. 203 must be either the same or more lenient than the Korean standards for reciprocity. (Choe, p. 1158).
Others argue that the foreign recognition standards not differ in any important respects from the requirements found in Art. 203. (Choe, p. 1158).
Recognition of a foreign divorce judgment becomes impossible, however, if the husbands national law is not applied in a suit in which the divorce defendant is Korean. The only court case to face this issue involved a Nevada ex parte divorce decree granted to a Korean businessman who had previously established a temporary residence in New York. The Supreme Court case 71 Da 1634 on Oct. 22, 1971 refused to recognize the Nevada divorce judgment between two Korean spouses on the ground of reciprocity. Since the Nevada court granted him a divorce for a reason not available in Korea (noncohabitation), the Supreme Court reasons that giving res judicata effect to the Nevada judgment, and thereby barring the wifes subsequent suit for divorce for malicious desertion and a monetary settlement, which it was considering, would violate Korean public policy evident in Article 18 of the Law concerning Conflict of Laws. While a foreign divorce judgment may be conclusive as to the question of marital status without application of Article 203, any provisions for payment of support can only be enforced by a suit in exequatur under Article 476. Recourse to exequatur on the foreign judgment will therefore cause Article 203 to become directly applicable, including the reciprocity requirement in Article 203 (4). (Choe, p. 1159).
In a 1971 case involving the recognition of a divorce decree of a Nevada state court, the Supreme Court of Korea clearly declared its support of the first theory (that is, the theory of same or more generous conditions). However, although the Supreme Court has never expressly admitted that it changed its position on this point, the Supreme Court is generally believed to have changed its position and nowadays to support the second theory since a decision of the Seoul District Court of 1995 which expressly took the second theory was upheld by the Supreme Court. Reciprocity means that as the Korean courts recognize judgments of foreign courts, so should the foreign courts recognize Korean judgments. Reciprocity purports to prevent inequitable treatment of Korean judgments by foreign courts. (Chung, p. 71).
The lower Korean courts have held that there was reciprocity between Korea and the State of New York, Germany, Japan, respectively. However, the Supreme Court of Korea denied the existence of reciprocity between Korea and Australia. (Chung, p. 72).

Extent of Recognition/ Enforcement

It is generally accepted in Korea that when a foreign judgment deals with more than one claim, recognition may cover only part of the judgment. It was not clear whether the amount for a judgment for one claim may be recognized only partially in terms of amount. An example is to recognize a judgment for punitive damages only to the extent consistent with the public policy of Korea by reducing the amount of the judgment. However, in a recent case the Supreme Court of Korea upheld the decision of the Seoul District Court which has expressly recognized only 50% of the amount of the foreign judgment. (Chung, p. 72-73).
There is also the question of public policy about a foreign judgment (particularly an American court) awarding so-called punitive damages or excessive damages. Some commentators have argued that Korean courts should refuse to recognize such a foreign judgment since it is inconsistent with the international standards for compensation of damages or, alternatively, Korean courts should reduce the amount of damages to a level comparable to international standards. In this connection, it should also be noted that the Conflict of Laws Act of Korea provides that damages for a tort committed abroad may be awarded in Korea only to the extent allowed under the relevant Korean law (Sec. 13 (3) CLA). In light of this provision, it may also be argued that a foreign judgment awarding damages for an amount greater than the one that may be awarded by a Korean court in a similar case should be regarded to be contrary to the public policy of Korea. (Chung, p. 75).
The 1995 case involved the recognition and enforcement of a judgment of the court of the State of Minnesota against the Korean defendant ordering payment of $500,000 as damages (including mental anguish, physical injury, consequent medical expenses, loss of earnings, etc) plus reasonable compensation for damages arising out of the assault and rape of the plaintiff, the Eastern Branch of Seoul District Court found that the amount of award was much higher than would be acceptable under Korean law for such damages and thus reduced the amount of compensation that would be enforceable to $250,000, i.e. 50% of the original amount awarded by the Minnesota court, based upon the rationale that recognition and enforcement of the portion in excess of $250,000 would be against the public policy of Korea. The judgment was upheld by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1997. See Judgment of September 9, 1997 in re 96 Da 47517 Case. (Chung, p. 77-78).

References

Choe Kong Woong Choe, Jurisdiction in Korean Conflict of Laws, 5 Korean Journal of Comparative Law 89-113 (1977), reprinted in The Law of Criminal and Civil Procedure.
Chung Transnational Litigation: A Practitioners Guide. Korea by Byung Suk Chung and Prof. Dr. Kwang Hyung Suk. Issued December, 2000.
Kim International execution against judgment debtors. Korea by Dook-Sik Kim, 1998.
Lee Confucian ethics, judges and women: Divorce under the revised Korean Family Law, 4 Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal (1995).

* Jeremy D Morley is a member of the New York law firm of Morley  Trager, which handles substantial international matrimonial matters. Jeremy D. Morley is admitted to practice only in the courts of the State of New York. E-mail: jmorley@international-divorce.com

Korea Civil Code - Marriage and Divorce

Korea Divorce Law Developments

Anti-Adultery Law Faces New Critics
Lee Jin-woo, Korea Times

 The law prohibiting adultery is expected to become a hot potato at the National Assembly’s regular session, as some ruling and opposition party lawmakers are pushing ahead with a bill abolishing it.

``The law punishing married people for committing adultery has been criticized for restricting individual freedom by ignoring each person’s right to decide their own sexual behavior,’’ said Rep. Yum Dong-yun of the governing Uri Party. ``The current law practically forces those committing an extra-marital affair divorce their spouses regardless of their willingness to continue their marriage.’’

Rep. Yum added many women, who have a relatively weak financial status in society, have been subject to severe punishment as they have been unable to financially compensate their husbands after violating the law.  

Several ruling and opposition party legislators, including Reps. Yoo Seung-hee and Lee Kyung-sook of the ruling party and Bae Il-do of the largest opposition Grand National Party (GNP), have expressed support for the bill.

``When it comes to a person’s decision on his or her sexual life, individual freedom should be guaranteed as a top priority, the social environment has been greatly changed and the public now has a much more liberal attitude toward sex,’’ said Rep. Yoo. ``The current law could be considered as a violation of basic human rights.’’

During a public hearing on the issue held at the National Assembly on Tuesday, several participants debated whether the current law protects women.

Those who supported the existence of the law claimed it prevents husbands from committing adultery and helps married women maintain a certain financial status by receiving compensation from their husbands in case of an unexpected divorce.

However, other groups asserted the law originated out of a pre-modern way of thinking that cloistered women, especially married women, and single and married women should be free from the law.

The Constitutional Court has ruled the law is constitutional three times in 2001, 1993 and 1990.

The court, however, said, ``Considering the public’s fast-changing attitude toward sex, the Assembly should start seriously considering the abolition of the law,’’ in its ruling in 2001, questioning the maintenance of the law in modern Korean society.

The Assembly attempted to abolish the law in 1994, but faced strong opposition from the public.

A few countries, such as Switzerland and Austria, have a similar anti-adultery law, but most advanced nations including the United States, France and Japan have put more priority to individual freedom than on punishing those who deceived their spouses.

 Couples Given More Time to Reconsider Divorce

By Bae Keun-min, Korea Times

The one-week deliberation period before divorce will be extended to two to four weeks from next month as the program has helped decrease the number of separations due to fits of anger.

The Seoul Family Court said Wednesday it is considering institutionalizing the pilot program, in operation since March.

``We believe the deliberation program will give couples that file for divorce because of an angry outburst more chances to restore their relations if the time length increases,’’ a court official said.

He added, they are considering extending the deliberation period up to four weeks, except for special cases, such as those involving domestic violence.

Revised Civil Code 
Step Toward Modern, Democratic Family System

KOREA TIMES

The parliament’s decision Wednesday to abolish the male-oriented family registration system was an inevitable _ if belated _ response to the change in the times. The time-honored ``hojuje,’’ which allows only men to head families, has little place in this era of gender equality. Still, efforts will be needed to minimize difficulties accompanying changes in old practices.

The revised Civil Law is a triumph of individual dignity and equality, as the Constitutional Court indicated in a ruling last month. It is ridiculous that a boy without a father should become the head of his family before his mother or grandmother. A child will now also be able to adopt his or her mother’s surname, or that of the stepfather in case of remarriage. This represents a step forward for human rights.

Statistics show families composed of two parents and children now only account for 51.2 percent of the total. The sharp increase in divorce and remarriage is itself due in part to a traditional male-oriented mentality, which fails to recognize a woman’s role as breadwinner. Children of single-parent families should not have to suffer from social prejudices. Allowing children to adopt the surnames of stepfathers will also help ease Koreans’ narrow-minded adherence to blood ties.

Those opposed to the move claim the new registry system could loosen traditional family ties, and perhaps hasten the end of the family unit. But these arguments, raised by elderly conservatives, are not persuasive. Korea’s traditional family system may have many merits, but it also needs to adapt to fit modern society. The realities faced by members of society far outweigh old values.

Actually, the ``hojuje,’’ introduced in 1898, was modeled on Japanese civil law, but Japan itself abolished the system in 1948 due to concerns over gender equality. Even the U.N. Human Commission recommended the abolition of the ``hojuje’’ in 1999, so politicians should be criticized for their belated move. Strong family ties will not disappear in a single day just with a change in the law.

We need to devise a better family registration system that guarantees equality and privacy for all.

03-02-2005

Chosun

Apr.14,2004

Court Rules Against Religious Spouse in Divorce Suit

A family court has ruled that a spouse who carries out religious activities which cause marital difficulties in the family is the one solely responsible for the divorce.

Devoted Christian's Namgung and Kim, who prefer to be addressed by their last names, wed in 2000. Namgung promised that after their marriage she would not partake in any religious activities.

However, after the birth of their son the following year, Namgung started attending religious services. Kim allowed her to carry religious beliefs if Namgung promised never to involve their son and to cause inconveniences at home.

A few days later, Namgung took her son to a religious meeting, abandoning ancestral rituals because she said it was against her religion.

In regards to their divorce, the Seoul Family Court ruled Wednesday that Namgung is responsible for aggravating the family relationship by strongly insisting on her religious beliefs. The court therefore approved the divorce and granted parental rights to Kim.

 Mar.26,2004

Govt. Steps Up Measures to Reduce Korea's Divorce Rate

With almost one out of every two couples in Korea filing for divorce, the government is looking into measures to help marriages in trouble stay afloat by urging the partners to attend counseling sessions before taking steps to end their union. Also to tackle another major social concern, faltering fertility rate, the government plans to offer financial assistance to families giving birth to two or more children.

Married couples may have to go through mandatory counseling sessions before they can untie their knots. Plans are in the works by the Health and Welfare Ministry to revise family litigation procedures by institutionalizing counseling programs for separating couples. The latest move comes in aims to prevent hasty breakups in light of the country's rising divorce rate of more than 47 percent, the third highest in the world, trailing closely behind the United States and Sweden.

In contrast to efforts being made to discourage couples from separating, another set of measures are under review to encourage more child bearing. The ministry plans to shoulder half the delivery expenses for every second baby while making it completely free of charge when giving birth to more than three as Korea's fertility rate continues to drop to record lows, currently standing at less than 1.2, the lowest among the member nations of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD).

Arirang TV

Jan. 20, 2001

Korean Married to Polygamist Gets Divorce

A Korean woman who married a national of an Islamic country, where polygamy is permitted, filed for a divorce suit and was granted divorce after her husband broke his promise not to keep another wife.

Judge Lee Sang-hun of the Seoul Family Court pronounced he was permitting the divorce of 38-year-old Kim from her 42-year-old Saudi Arabian husband under the application of the Korean Civic Law that accepts monogamy because Kim is a Korean national.

Kim had married her former Saudi Arabian husband in 1988 after receiving a pledge he would not keep another wife but she filed for a divorce last year after learning her husband had married another woman in Saudi Arabia.

July 3, 2000

Record Divorce Suit Filed Against Chaebol Owner

The wife of a Chaebol group's chairman filed for divorce at the Seoul Family Court Monday requesting some W100 billion (about US$100 million) as a settlement, the largest amount in the history of Korea.

The 73-year-old woman said she cannot maintain her marriage anymore because of her 76-year-old husband's beatings and extra-marital affairs, and therefore, that she deserved to request at least W100 billion.

The woman is represented by a team of eight lawyers, while her husband has hired an ex-minister.

ADULTERY LAW

Serial Adulterer Ordered to Pay W900 Mil. for Infidelity

By Na Jeong-ju
Staff Reporter Korea Times, 2003

A court in Seoul yesterday ordered a husband involved in frequent extra-marital affairs to pay his wife a huge sum of alimony and terminate their marriage.

Ruling in favor of the wife, who filed for divorce, the Seoul Family Court said the husbands inappropriate relationships with other women and ignorance of his responsibility to take care of his family were just reason for terminating the marriage.

``The husband had unlawful on-off relationships with several women, and even lived together with one woman, causing unbearable mental anguish to his wife, the court said. It ordered the 58-year-old husband to pay her 50 million won in compensation for the stress and give 40 percent of his property as part of the divorce settlement, bringing the total alimony to 900 million won.

Before they married, the husband was already wed to other woman, but concealed it to pursue a sexual relationship with his present wife, promising to marry her. After finding out her lover was a married man, the then fiancee demanded a break-up, but the husband divorced his previous wife to marry her in 1978.

His second wife took in a son that she didn't know the man had from his first marriage. She subsequently brought the child up as her own.

Even after their marriage, the husband had affairs with several women and left his offspring in her care.


Should Adultery Be a Crime in Korea?

Hot Debate on "Adultery"

By Kim Myun Joong

Staff reporter, Seoul Times, 2001

Do you remember the movie "The Scarlet Letter"? This movie opens with Hester being led to the scaffold where she is to be publicly shamed for having committed adultery. Hester is forced to wear the letter "A" - which is an initial of the term "adultery" - on her gown always.

What about "The Bridges of Madison County"? This movie is about the love between a middle-aged, Italian-American housewife and a photographer of National Geographic. But what if they met and fell in love with each other in Korea? They might be punished in the name of "LAW".

Should adultery be a crime? One of major debates in Korea these days. Responding to a challenge by a couple having an extramarital affair, the Constitutional Court on Oct. 25 ruled that Article 241 of the criminal law is constitutional. This is the third time since 1990 that Article 241 has been challenged.

The Court said that the law was necessary to preserve the morals and the integrity of a monogamous society and also to protect society from family problems and other ills that arise from adultery. However, the Court proposed that lawmakers seriously consider whether or not to abolish Article 241 as a criminal offense in view of the legal codes in other countries and changes in Korea's attitudes toward sex.

According to a recent survey, 69% of the respondents - 55% of the males and 84% of the females - support the law. But 75% of all Korean men admit to adultery while only 15% of females do. Civic and feminist groups are taking up the debate. There are various voices on this issue. Park So Hyun, an advisor at "The Korean Legal Aid Center for Family Relations" says "We support the adultery law because of women's economic situation. If women divorced, they would be in trouble because women have less ability to make money. The law also upholds moral, family and traditional values."

"The government should not interrupt the people's right to pursue love and happiness with those of their choosing", says Yang Hai Kyoung, chief advisor of "the Korean Women Link."

"Private rights need to be protected. People used to think that the law was intended to protect women but this is not the real situation," she continues. "Even though men commit adultery more than women do, men complain about adultery more than women. Women tend to bear the burden of adultery. Therefore, the law is not effective in dealing with adultery," she adds.

Editor of "If" (a feminist magazine) Kim-Shin Myung Sook says "Adultery laws are no longer effective because society is changing. People assume that Article 241 is for women. But nowadays women are also committing adultery. So the law doesn't protect women's rights."

Kim Sung Chun, professor of law at Choongang University, says: "Even though adultery is morally or ethically bad, there is something wrong for the criminal law to deal with adultery because criminal law is the law that deals with social crimes." "Even though there is some good function of this law in that it can protect women who are seen as weak in society, there are some problems as women use the law to get revenge," she says.

"Korea, Taiwan, Greece, Switzerland and Austria are the only non-Muslim countries that still criminalize adultery. As Korea's social structure modernizes, pressure will mount to rescind this law in Korea," she adds.


Lewd Online Chatting Responsible for Divorce

The Chosun Ilbo, Sept. 9, 2004

A 41-year-old housewife, who was addicted to lewd online chatting, was judged to be responsible for her divorce and should pay W20 million in compensation.

Ms. A, who married 16 years ago, first started online chatting and Internet games in 2000.

A, who even made and received frequent phone calls from her chatting partners, argued with her husband over the habit, but started to enjoy video chatting from 2002 after installing a camera on her personal computer.

Her husband, who heard his wife moaning by coincidence, set up a tape recorder in secret and confirmed that the wife was addicted to lewd online chatting. The couple finally separated, and the husband raised a divorce suit.

Judge Hong Joong-pyo of Seoul Family Court handed down a judgment Sunday, insisting, "The wife frequently had lewd online chatting sessions with various men and refused to control herself, despite breaking the couple's trust. Therefore, she is responsible for the divorce and should pay W20 million to the husband as compensation.