Cryptocurrency is no longer a niche investment in South Korea. Many people now hold Bitcoin, Ethereum, and smaller “altcoins” through domestic exchanges, overseas platforms, and personal wallets. As a result, digital assets are appearing more often in divorce cases, where one spouse claims that the other is holding coins that should be shared.
Under Korean law, cryptocurrency can be divided in a divorce. However, courts do not simply add up what is in a wallet. They ask when and how the assets were acquired, who actually controlled them, whether the quantity can be proven, and whether the coins still have real economic value.
These questions are particularly important for foreign residents in South Korea, who may hold digital assets on overseas exchanges or in self-custody wallets that are difficult to trace. This article examines the legal basis for dividing cryptocurrency in a Korean divorce, how recent court decisions have treated digital assets, how ownership is proven, and the practical steps spouses can take to protect their share.
Table of Contents
Can Cryptocurrency Be Divided in a Korean Divorce?
Under Article 839-2 of the 『Civil Act』, a divorced spouse may claim a division of property. If the spouses cannot agree, the family court determines the amount and method of division by considering the property acquired through the cooperation of both spouses and other circumstances. Through Article 843, the same rule applies to a judicial divorce.
The Civil Act does not list specific types of property. What matters is whether an asset has economic value and was built up through the couple’s joint efforts during the marriage. In 2018, the Supreme Court held that Bitcoin is “intangible property with economic value” that may be confiscated as criminal proceeds (Supreme Court Decision 2018Do3619, May 30, 2018). Although that was a criminal case, it is widely cited as the basis for treating cryptocurrency as property that can also be divided in a divorce.
The name on an account does not decide the question.
Civil Act Article 830 (Peculiar Property and Property of which Title is Uncertain)
(1) Inherent property belonging to either husband or wife from the time before the marriage and property acquired during the marriage in his or her own name shall constitute his or her peculiar property.
(2) Any property, of which title is uncertain between the husband and wife, shall be presumed to be in their co-ownership.
Under Article 830 of the Civil Act, property that one spouse owned before the marriage, or acquired during the marriage in his or her own name, is that spouse’s peculiar property, and property whose ownership is unclear is presumed to be jointly owned.
However, Korean courts have long held that property built up through the cooperation of both spouses during the marriage, including cash and deposits, may be divided regardless of whose name it is held in or who manages it. This means that coins held in one spouse’s exchange account may still be divided if they were purchased with marital income or savings. Contributions such as housework and childcare are also taken into account.
Timing is also critical because cryptocurrency prices can change dramatically. In a judicial divorce, the divisible property and its value are generally determined as of the date the court closes its hearings.
However, there are two important exceptions. First, assets that are easy to spend or hide, such as bank deposits, are often counted as of the date the marriage broke down, so that a spouse cannot reduce the estate by moving money after the relationship ends. Second, assets acquired after the breakdown through one spouse’s own efforts, and unrelated to the couple’s joint property, may be excluded.
For cryptocurrency, this means a court may fix the ‘number of coins’ as of one date but assess their ‘price’ as of a later date. If prices fall sharply while the case is pending, the amount a spouse ultimately receives can shrink accordingly.
What Courts Actually Look At: Two Recent Cases
Showing that a spouse owns cryptocurrency is the first step. Two recent decisions show different reasons why digital assets may still be left out of a property division.
Case 1: Suwon High Court Decision 2024Reu11577, 2024Reu13306 (November 5, 2025): the coins were real, but nearly worthless
In this divorce case, the wife argued that six types of cryptocurrency held by the husband should be included in the marital estate.
Even so, the court excluded the coins entirely. Most of them were barely traded, and their most recent prices were tiny fractions of a US dollar or a Korean won. One coin had a recorded price of zero. Considering the latest trading prices and the quantities held, the court found that the coins had no economic value worth dividing. The court’s approach shows the following:
- Each coin is assessed separately based on its actual trading price.
- Coins with little or no trading activity may have no divisible value, no matter how many units are held.
Case 2: Seoul Central District Court Decision 2025Gadan56922 (December 11, 2025): crypto bought with embezzled funds is not marital property
A finance employee embezzled about KRW 24.6 billion from his employer between 2016 and 2022. He married in 2016 and divorced his wife by agreement in September 2021. In February 2022, he used embezzled funds to buy the cryptocurrency XRP, moved it to an overseas exchange, converted it into the stablecoin USDT, and transferred it to a hardware wallet. He then handed the hardware wallet and its recovery seed phrase to his former wife. He was later sentenced to 12 years in prison, and the USDT was confiscated.
The employer then sued the former wife, claiming that assets the husband had transferred to her were fraudulent transfers. The court noted that the cryptocurrency the husband had acquired with criminal proceeds was not joint property created through the couple’s cooperation and therefore could not be divided.
What These Cases Mean for You
- Proving the coins exist is not enough; you must also prove their value. A spouse who claims cryptocurrency should be prepared to show both the quantity held on the reference date and a reliable market price. Coins that are rarely traded may be treated as worthless.
- The source of the money matters more than the form of the asset. Coins bought with marital income can be divided even if they are held in one spouse’s name. Coins bought with pre-marital funds, an inheritance, a gift, or criminal proceeds may be excluded.
- Timing can change the result. The reference date determines both the quantity and the price. In a volatile market, whether the court looks at the date of breakdown or the date hearings close can significantly affect the outcome.
Proving Who Really Owns the Coins
Cryptocurrency transactions are permanently recorded on the blockchain, but a wallet address does not show the owner’s name. In disputes between spouses, courts look for evidence that links a wallet or account to a specific person.
Without a Clear Link, Tracing Fails
In Seoul Central District Court Decision 2023Gahap85138 (September 25, 2025), a spouse in the middle of divorce proceedings sued the other spouse to recover about 8.35 Bitcoin, claiming that the coins had been lent on a promise to “grow” them. The court dismissed the claim. There was no evidence that the receiving wallet was controlled by the other spouse. Some Bitcoin did move through a chain of wallets to a wallet in the name of the other spouse’s sibling, but so many other transactions took place along the way that the court could not conclude that the plaintiff’s coins had ended up there.
Court Tools for Uncovering Hidden Assets
Family Litigation Act
Article 48-2 (Property Statement) (1) Any family court may, when deeming specifically required for cases claiming division of property, support allowances and child support for minor children, order the relevant party to submit a property list stating his or her property status either ex officio or upon request by the relevant party.
Article 48-3 (Property Inquiry) (1) Any family court may inquire the property under the title of the relevant party, either ex officio or upon request by the relevant party, when deemed difficult to settle cases claiming division of property, support allowances and child support for minor children based only on the property list submitted following property statement procedures under Article 48-2.
In property division cases, the family court may order a spouse to submit a detailed list of assets and, if that list is not sufficient, may inquire into assets held in a spouse’s name with financial institutions and other bodies. Courts may also issue document production orders to cryptocurrency exchanges. Because domestic exchanges operate under real-name verification rules, knowing which exchange a spouse uses can make it possible to confirm holdings through the court. Overseas exchanges and cold wallets, however, are much harder to trace, and international judicial assistance can take months or even years.
How to Protect Your Share
Identify Exchanges and Wallets Early
Write down every exchange, wallet address, and app your spouse has used, and preserve screenshots, withdrawal confirmation emails, and messages that mention cryptocurrency. Details such as the exchange name, account ID, wallet address, and the bank account used to cash out are often the key to obtaining records through the court.
Follow the Money In and Out
Bank transfers to exchanges, withdrawals back to bank accounts, and large purchases funded by coin sales can reveal holdings even after the coins themselves have been moved. As the Seoul High Court case shows, courts can rebuild the flow of funds from these points.
Act Quickly if Assets Are Being Moved
Cryptocurrency can be transferred in minutes. If a spouse transfers assets to a third party in order to defeat a property division claim, the other spouse may ask the family court to revoke the transfer under Article 839-3 of the Civil Act. Provisional measures to preserve assets while the case is pending should also be considered as early as possible.
Put Any Crypto-Based Settlement in Writing
In Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2024Guhap67078 (August 13, 2025), a husband traded cryptocurrency through accounts opened in his former wife’s name, and billions of won in profits ended up in her bank accounts. The tax office treated part of this money as a property division, which is not subject to gift tax, but taxed the rest as a gift. The wife argued that more of the money was also a property division payment. The court rejected her argument because there was no written agreement or other objective evidence to support it, and upheld a gift tax of about KRW 1.93 billion. This implies that if cryptocurrency is part of your settlement, put the property division agreement in writing, or the payment may be taxed as a gift.
Conclusion
Cryptocurrency can be divided in a Korean divorce in the same way as bank deposits or stocks, as long as it was built up during the marriage through the couple’s joint efforts and its quantity and value can be proven. At the same time, courts look beyond the name on an account. They examine who controlled the assets, where the money came from, what was held on the reference date, and whether the coins have real market value.
If you are going through a divorce and suspect that your spouse holds or has hidden digital assets, or if you hold cryptocurrency yourself and want to understand how it may be treated, early legal advice can make a significant difference. Contact Seoul Law Group to discuss your situation and arrange a consultation.