Blocking Unlisted Stock Concealment Through Share Attachment in Korean Divorce

In divorce property-division cases, the most common difficulty clients raise is the situation where "I suspect my spouse is hiding assets, but I have no objective evidence." This is especially true when the other party runs an unlisted company in their own name — company shares and retained earnings get tangled together, making it hard to quantify your share. This case illustrates how an attachment over unlisted stock preserved the client's right to property division in exactly that kind of difficult situation.

In this case, the client described the following difficulties.

• The spouse was operating an unlisted company in their own name
• A substantial portion of the marital property was tied up in company shares
• Once the client expressed an intention to divorce, the spouse began moving to dispose of shares and change ownership
• If the disposal were completed, the property-division claim would effectively become meaningless

In this kind of situation, the first measure to consider is typically a preservation order.

A provisional attachment is a procedure that locks the counterparty's assets so they cannot be disposed of before the judgment in the main action (the divorce and property-division claim). Unlisted stock differs from ordinary real estate or listed shares, so the following points typically need to be reviewed in parallel.

• The company's articles of incorporation, shareholder register, and share-issuance status
• The company's financial statements, retained earnings, and debt structure
• Transactions among related shareholders and the possibility of nominee shareholders
• The location of the company's head office and corporate registration records

Once the attachment is granted, the counterparty cannot, by their own decision alone, dispose of or transfer the shares. That is the moment when the client's right to property division gets its first line of protection.

With assets preserved by the attachment, the main proceedings moved forward. The client ultimately received approximately KRW 1.08 billion in property division. Without the attachment, the company shares and retained earnings could have effectively slipped out of reach — a circumstance that decisively changed the result.

The same facts will not always lead to the same result. But this case shows how heavily the timing of preservation, and a precise approach to a special asset like unlisted stock, can weigh on the outcome.

In consultations, I typically recommend reviewing preservation measures when two or more of the following signals appear together.

• Signs that the spouse has suddenly transferred part of their company shares into a relative's name
• Traces of large transfers from the spouse's corporate account to a personal account
• Newly established companies, branches, or subsidiaries created right after the divorce intention was expressed
• Signs that the spouse has shifted real estate registered in their name to family or acquaintances
• Sudden changes in the accounting practices of the spouse's business

These signals often form part of preparatory steps that quietly neutralize the right to property division.

When you are evaluating preservation measures, preparing the following materials typically accelerates the case.

• Your mapping of the marital property — real estate, deposits, shares, business equity
• Contributions you made during the marriage — household work, childcare, economic activity
• Materials showing the spouse's asset-disposal patterns — registries, transaction histories, third-party statements
• Company information currently verifiable by you — business registration, corporate registry, public filings

Here are misconceptions clients often raise about this kind of case.

• "It isn't registered in my name, so division would be difficult, right?" — If it is in substance marital property, it is typically subject to division
• "Company shares are for business use, so they aren't subject to division, right?" — Value formed during the marriage is typically divisible based on contribution
• "I didn't directly participate in the business, so my contribution is low, right?" — Household and childcare work also typically contribute to the stability of the business

Q. Can an attachment over unlisted stock be obtained before filing the main action? A. Yes. A preservation order can be used either before or after the main action is filed, and it becomes a decisive tool when the risk of disposal is high. However, a certain prima facie showing of the necessity of preservation and the existence of the claim is required.

Q. Is there a possibility the attachment is not granted? A. It depends on the case. If the necessity of preservation or the prima facie showing of the claim is judged insufficient, the request can be partially accepted or dismissed. That is why preservation measures tend to be won or lost at the precision of preparation.

If you would like a brief review of whether preservation measures fit your situation, chat with us now — even a rough outline of your asset structure and the disposal signals is enough.

Family and Inheritance Team, Jonjae Law Firm Family-law and inheritance attorneys Last reviewed 2026-05-30

This article provides general legal information and does not substitute for legal advice on an individual matter. The same facts will not always lead to the same outcome, and results can vary depending on the case, so please consult an attorney for specific disputes.

Because unlisted shares have no formed market price, valuation itself is typically the single biggest variable. In practice, the following methods are considered together.

• Net asset value method — dividing net assets on the financial statements by the number of shares
• Earnings value method — reflecting the company's earning capacity in the valuation
• Valuation methods under the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act — applying a defined formula

Different valuation methods on the same company often produce significantly different values. So even after the preservation stage, the choice of valuation method in the main action often decides the case. Securing an opinion from an accounting expert is decisive for objectifying your share.

One point worth underlining: with assets that carry a high risk of disposal, time itself becomes your loss. Starting the review the moment you sense a suspicious signal is, in the end, the most efficient path in both cost and time. Remember that a preservation order is a starting line that protects the outcome of the main action — it is not a substitute for the main action itself.

To judge whether preservation measures alone, or a combination with the main action, better fits your case, a staged review that looks at both the disposability of the asset and the available time is decisive.