Open Decision Ledger · Family & inheritance law
Debt reduced after the marriage broke down, fixed at the breakdown point
Supreme Court, May 17, 2024, 2024Meu10721 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 이혼·이혼및위자료
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
In a judicial divorce, where a debt already in existence when the marriage broke down was reduced before the close of oral argument through the efforts or costs of one spouse alone, is that reduced amount still property to be divided, or is the debt fixed as at the time of the breakdown?
Holding
No. Property division clears and distributes what the spouses formed together during the marriage, so a debt one spouse alone bore, with the other having nothing to do with its creation, maintenance or the burden of it, cannot be made an object of division. The property to be divided and its amount are in principle fixed as at the close of oral argument in the divorce suit, but where a change in the asset position between the breakdown and that date came from later circumstances of one spouse and is unrelated to what was formed jointly during the marriage, that change must be left out; the debt for division is therefore the debt as it stood at the breakdown. The court must examine when and how the debt was reduced in order to fix the debt that is divided.
Points at issue, verbatim
재산분할 대상 채무가 혼인관계 파탄 이후 변론종결일에 이르기까지 감소하였고, 그 감소가 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하게 부부 중 일방의 노력이나 비용으로 이루어진 경우, 그 감소 부분이 재산분할의 대상이 되는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
Where a debt subject to division of property has decreased between the breakdown of the marriage and the date on which oral argument concluded, and the decrease was brought about by the efforts or expenses of one of the spouses without any connection to the property relations jointly formed during the marriage, whether that decreased portion is subject to division of property (negative)
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결 중 본소와 반소의 각 재산분할 청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 부산가정법원에 환송한다. 나머지 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed as to the portions concerning the claims for division of property in the principal action and the counterclaim, and this part of the case is remanded to the Busan Family Court. The remainder of the final appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
바꾸어 말하면, 어떤 적극재산이나 채무가 부부 쌍방의 협력이 아니라 부부 중 일방에 의하여 생긴 것으로서 상대방이 그 형성이나 유지 또는 부담과 무관한 경우에는 이를 재산분할의 대상으로 삼을 수 없다.
Unofficial English translation
In other words, where an asset or debt has arisen not from the cooperation of both spouses but from one of the spouses, and the other spouse has no involvement in its formation, maintenance, or assumption, it cannot be taken as an object of division of property.
Factors
- 어떤 적극재산이나 채무가 부부 쌍방의 협력이 아니라 부부 중 일방에 의하여 생긴 것으로서 상대방이 그 형성이나 유지 또는 부담과 무관한 경우
- 혼인관계가 파탄된 이후 변론종결일 사이에 생긴 재산관계의 변동이 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하다는 등의 사정이 있는 경우
- 재산분할 대상 채무가 혼인관계 파탄 이후 변론종결일에 이르기까지 감소하였고, 그 감소가 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하게 부부 중 일방의 노력이나 비용으로 이루어진 경우
- 분할 대상이 되는 재산과 그 액수 산정의 기준시기(=이혼소송의 사실심 변론종결일)
Unofficial English translation
• Where an asset or debt has arisen not from the cooperation of both spouses but from one of the spouses, and the other spouse has no involvement in its formation, maintenance, or assumption
• Where there are circumstances such that a change in the property relations arising between the breakdown of the marriage and the date on which oral argument concluded is unrelated to the property relations jointly formed during the marriage
• Where a debt subject to division of property has decreased between the breakdown of the marriage and the date on which oral argument concluded, and the decrease was brought about by the efforts or expenses of one of the spouses without any connection to the property relations jointly formed during the marriage
• The reference time for determining the property subject to division and the calculation of the amount thereof (= the date on which oral argument concluded in the fact-finding trial of the divorce action)
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2013. 6. 20. 선고 2010므4071, 4088 전원합의체 판결(공2013하, 1332)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court en banc judgment 2010Meu4071, 4088 decided June 20, 2013 (Gong 2013 Ha, 1332)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2013. 6. 20. 선고 2010므4071, 4088 전원합의체 판결(공2013하, 1332) / [2] 대법원 2013. 11. 28. 선고 2013므1455, 1462 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where only part of the debt's reduction after the breakdown came from one spouse's own efforts and costs, how is the divisible debt to be apportioned between the two sides?
The judgment of the Busan Family Court on remand, after its judgment in 2023Reu20055, 20062 was quashed, once it examines the breakdown point and the history of the repayments, will show how the divisible debt is fixed. An amendment to Article 839-2 or Article 843 of the Civil Act, or a later decision revising Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4071, 4088 en banc, would also require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “Where only part of the debt's reduction after the breakdown came from one spouse's own efforts and costs, how is the divisible debt to be apportioned between the two sides?” vs Independent “What were the precise date of marital breakdown and the sources of the subsequent debt repayments in this case?”
The primary reading asks how to split the divisible debt when the reduction was partly from one spouse's efforts and partly from other sources. The independent reading asks for the exact breakdown date and the sources of repayment, which are fact-finding points on remand.
재산분할 대상 채무가 혼인관계 파탄 이후 변론종결일에 이르기까지 감소하였고, 그 감소가 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하게 부부 중 일방의 노력이나 비용으로 이루어진 경우, 그 감소 부분이 재산분할의 대상이 되는지 여부(소극)Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Busan Family Court, in its judgment of 20 December 2023 (2023Reu20055, 20062), took as the debt for division the balance outstanding around July 2023, the time when oral argument closed, rather than the balance of KRW 115,435,152 recorded as at 25 June 2021, which the defendant had asked to be included as his negative asset. On the alimony claims it adopted the first-instance reasoning, held that the main responsibility for the breakdown lay with the plaintiff, dismissed the plaintiff's claim and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant KRW 3 million.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the record showed nothing that the debt had been reduced out of property formed during the marriage or in which the plaintiff had a hand in maintaining it, and that the reduction after the breakdown may instead have come from the defendant's own efforts and costs, unrelated to any property formed jointly. It therefore held that the court below had to examine when the marriage broke down and how the debt had been reduced in order to fix the debt for division, and that failing to do so was a misreading of the law on the scope of property division that affected the judgment. It reversed the property division parts of both the principal and the counterclaim and remanded them to the Busan Family Court, while finding no error in the reasoning on the alimony award and dismissing the rest of the appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A reduction of the debt brought about by property formed during the marriage, or by the other spouse's contribution to maintaining it, since such a reduction is not unrelated to the jointly formed asset position.
- A debt one spouse bore alongside the formation of joint assets or in procuring expenses needed for the spouses' shared married life, since such a debt is an object of division.
- A reduction of the debt that the other spouse cooperated in or contributed to after the separation began, since that too ties the reduction to the marriage.
Record verification notes
Before relying on this decision, trace the debt from its origin: the freight vehicle bought around July 2019 for a principal of KRW 182,000,000, borrowed from an outside company and repaid in monthly instalments over 72 months from August 2019. Set the balance at the breakdown point against the balance at the close of oral argument, and gather what shows whose money paid each instalment after the separation began in around December 2021. Keep the alimony part separate, since it was left standing and is not open to review on this ground.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 부부가 이혼을 할 때 재산분할의 대상이 되는 재산의 범위 / 어떤 적극재산이나 채무가 부부 쌍방의 협력이 아니라 부부 중 일방에 의하여 생긴 것으로서 상대방이 그 형성이나 유지 또는 부담과 무관한 경우, 이를 재산분할의 대상으로 삼을 수 있는지 여부(소극) [2] 재판상 이혼에 따른 재산분할에서 분할 대상이 되는 재산과 그 액수 산정의 기준시기(=이혼소송의 사실심 변론종결일) / 혼인관계가 파탄된 이후 변론종결일 사이에 생긴 재산관계의 변동이 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하다는 등의 사정이 있는 경우, 변동된 재산이 재산분할의 대상이 되는지 여부(소극) / 재산분할 대상 채무가 혼인관계 파탄 이후 변론종결일에 이르기까지 감소하였고, 그 감소가 혼인 중 공동으로 형성한 재산관계와 무관하게 부부 중 일방의 노력이나 비용으로 이루어진 경우, 그 감소 부분이 재산분할의 대상이 되는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] The scope of property subject to division of property when spouses divorce / Whether an asset or debt that has arisen not from the cooperation of both spouses but from one of the spouses, where the other spouse has no involvement in its formation, maintenance, or assumption, may be included as an object of division of property (negative) [2] The reference time for determining the property subject to division and the calculation of the amount thereof in the division of property following a judicial divorce (= the date on which oral argument concluded in the fact-finding trial of the divorce action) / Where there are circumstances such that a change in the property relations arising between the breakdown of the marriage and the date on which oral argument concluded is unrelated to the property relations jointly formed during the marriage, whether the changed property is subject to division of property (negative) / Where a debt subject to division of property has decreased between the breakdown of the marriage and the date on which oral argument concluded, and the decrease was brought about by the efforts or expenses of one of the spouses without any connection to the property relations jointly formed during the marriage, whether that decreased portion is subject to division of property (negative)
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결 중 본소와 반소의 각 재산분할 청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 부산가정법원에 환송한다. 나머지 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed as to the portions concerning the claims for division of property in the principal action and the counterclaim, and this part of the case is remanded to the Busan Family Court. The remainder of the final appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 민법 제839조의2, 제843조 [2] 민법 제839조의2, 제843조
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger