The legal battle involving SK Group Chairman Tae-won Choi (최태원) and Art Center Nabi director So-young No (노소영) has widened beyond an asset division lawsuit. After prosecutors decided not to indict No's representative over remarks involving "100 billion won", Choi's side filed an appeal. In a statement on Monday, Choi's legal representative said the living expenses Choi spent with director Hee-young Kim (김희영) totaled about 2 billion won at the time in question, signaling further courtroom confrontation.

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office on Sept. 9 decided not to indict attorney Sang-won Lee (이상원), who represents No, for defamation due to insufficient evidence. In November 2023, during No's lawsuit for consolation money, Lee told reporters that the money Choi spent on Kim exceeded 100 billion won even considering only the period since 2015, and Choi filed a complaint over the remark. Prosecutors said Lee's remarks had some basis and that Choi's side did not sufficiently present evidence to overturn them.

Choi's side read the decision differently. The legal representative said the non-indictment meant only that there was insufficient evidence to prove awareness of false information, and that "nowhere in the decision is there any judgment that the circulated figures were confirmed as fact." Even so, Choi's side said the decision is being distributed as if it recognized the claim's truth, repeating distortions. It said it appealed to seek another judgment through procedures set by law.

Choi's side put the actual amount spent at about 2 billion won. The legal representative said the figure for living expenses Choi used with Kim was "confirmed through an investigation of financial transaction records and explained in detail to the asset division trial court." The representative added that both No and Lee knew of this explanation. Applying that standard, the 100 billion won cited in media interviews would be more than 50 times the actual amount.

Choi's side said the gap arose from combining expenditures with different purposes into a single total. A representative example is 20.4 billion won that left a Kookmin Bank account opened during a period when Choi was imprisoned. The legal representative said the account was opened for No and that a substantial portion of the spending was money No took, but that the account, unrelated to Kim, was still counted as Kim-related spending. The representative also claimed that contributions and donations made to the ChildFund Korea, the Community Chest of Korea and the T&C Foundation were bundled in the same way.

The legal representative said this aggregation method is also linked to the ongoing asset division lawsuit. The representative said the figure included a home and artworks in Choi's sole name, and that these assets are personal assets subject to division and are already before the court in the asset division proceedings with No.

After the Seoul High Court on Aug. 24 ordered Choi to pay 944 billion won in a retrial after remand and Choi filed an appeal to the top court, the proceedings are back before the Supreme Court. Choi's side said No's side demands division in court by treating the same assets as marital joint property, while claiming in the media that they were assets gifted to Kim, and that the two claims cannot both stand.

With the appeal, the defamation case will again be reviewed by the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office. Choi's side said Lee, as counsel in the asset division lawsuit, was in a position to verify the facts but sought to influence the ongoing trial through a public opinion campaign favorable to No, and disclosed even trial materials and personal financial information that cannot be made public under the Family Litigation Act. It said the appeal review is expected to dispute whether Lee made the remarks while knowing the figures differed from the facts.