Choi Tae-won, chairman of SK Group, has filed an appeal against the prosecutor's decision not to indict a lawyer representing Noh So-young, director of the Art Center Nabi, who claimed that Choi spent over 100 billion won on Kim Hee-young, chair of the TNC Foundation.
On September 15, Choi's legal representatives issued a statement announcing the appeal regarding the prosecutor's decision related to defamation charges against Lee Sang-won, the lawyer for Noh. Lee had previously claimed in media interviews that Choi had spent over 100 billion won on Kim.
Choi's team countered that the amount spent on living expenses with Kim, as confirmed by financial transaction records, was approximately 2 billion won at the time the claims were made.
Choi's representatives stated, "Both Noh and Lee were aware of these clarifications during the property division trial," adding that the total amount was inflated by combining unrelated expenditures from Choi's accounts and including funds paid directly to Noh.
They argued that the figures presented by Lee included expenses for Noh and her three children. According to Choi's team, a total of 20.4 billion won was spent from a bank account opened during Choi's imprisonment, which was established for Noh and used significantly for her expenses. They claimed that expenditures unrelated to Kim were misrepresented as related to her.
Choi's team also pointed out that public donations and contributions to charitable foundations were included in the calculations. Funds given to organizations such as the Children's Foundation and the Community Chest of Korea were used for public welfare projects, yet were counted as gifts to Kim.
Additionally, they raised concerns about the inclusion of Choi's individually owned properties and artworks. Choi's representatives stated, "These assets were treated as personal property in the property division proceedings," arguing that it is contradictory to claim in the media that they were gifted to Kim while simultaneously requesting their division as marital property in court.
Choi's team asserted that Lee, as a representative in the property division lawsuit, had the opportunity to verify the facts but repeatedly disclosed inflated figures to the media. They also included in their appeal the claim that Lee disclosed court documents and personal financial information that should not have been made public under family litigation law.
Choi's representatives emphasized, "The prosecutor's decision not to indict indicates a lack of evidence to prove awareness of the false claims," stating that there is no determination in the decision that confirms the figures circulated as factual.
They added, "The non-indictment decision is being misrepresented as an acknowledgment of the truth of the claims, leading to repeated distortions," and confirmed their intention to seek a reevaluation through the legal process.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.