Sometimes, a marriage breaks down beyond repair, leaving separation as the only option. Even relationships once strong enough to cross borders are no exception.
Divorces between Korean and foreign spouses accounted for 7.1 percent of all divorces in South Korea in 2025, totaling about 6,000 cases, up 4.2 percent from a year earlier.
As a growing number of such cases lead to prolonged and complex legal battles requiring extensive information and support, foreign nationals often find themselves navigating the process with limited understanding of a different legal system.
With insights from Bang Suh-eun of Soul, a Seoul-based law firm, The Korea Herald examined divorce cases involving Korean and foreign nationals, focusing on trends, asset division and child custody.
How does the procedure differ from divorces between Korean couples?
Divorce procedures for Korean-foreign couples are not significantly different once the court’s jurisdiction and applicable law are determined.
Under Korea’s Act on Private International Law, Korean courts can take jurisdiction if the couple’s last habitual residence was in Korea, if one party still lives in Korea, or if both the plaintiff and any minor children reside in the country.
Korean law is generally applied when at least one party is a Korean national with habitual residence in Korea. While rulings issued in Korea are not automatically effective abroad, they can serve as a basis for recognition in other jurisdictions.
Proceedings typically take more than a year. Legal costs are also about 10 to 20 percent higher than in cases involving only Korean nationals, as courts must review international documents and often communicate in English, Bang said.
Are there visa safeguards for those with their livelihoods and children in Korea?
Foreign nationals with custody or visitation rights to a Korean child may obtain an F-6-2 visa, which allows them to live and work in Korea, usually until the child reaches adulthood.
If there is no child, the foreign national must prove that the divorce was not their fault to retain residency and employment rights. This is typically determined through a court ruling or mediation agreement, often based on whether alimony is awarded, Bang explained.
What are some notable recent trends?
International divorce cases increasingly involve overseas assets, adding complexity as more Koreans hold assets abroad.
Bang pointed to cases in which couples register their marriage in Korea despite not living there, while keeping most of their assets in the foreign spouse’s home country.
“In such cases, the division of overseas assets must be handled through local authorities. However, those authorities may not recognize the assets as jointly owned through marriage, but rather as co-owned property, creating practical challenges,” she said.
“As the value of overseas assets increases, so does the tax burden. Taxes arising during asset division must be assessed under each country’s tax system, making this a key issue.”
What is the trickiest issue in divorce procedures?
Child custody disputes are among the most challenging, Bang said, citing the lack of clear standards.
“Custody decisions are based on the best interests of the child, which involves value judgments and leaves room for judicial discretion,” she said. “Because of the deep emotional attachment parents have to their children, neither side is willing to back down easily.”
She added that child support decisions may face challenges in foreign courts, particularly when the child lives abroad or has strong ties to another country, even though other aspects of Korean divorce rulings are generally recognized.
“Korean family courts apply child support guidelines based on income standards set in 2021, while in the US, guidelines are updated annually to reflect inflation,” Bang said. “From a US perspective, this could be seen as unreasonable, leaving room for disputes.”
Could foreign nationals be treated differently in proceedings and outcomes?
Bang said custody practices in Korea tend to favor Korean nationals, particularly in cases involving international child abduction rules.
“When a foreign national takes a child abroad without the spouse’s consent, they may be required to return the child under the Hague Convention, which can put them at a disadvantage in custody decisions,” she said.
“In contrast, when a child is moved within Korea and becomes out of reach of the foreign parent, courts often base temporary custody on the child’s current residence, effectively favoring the Korean parent.”
However, Bang said such practices can still be challenged and called for clearer legal standards to prevent unilateral removal of children during custody disputes.
She cited a recent case involving a South African national and a Korean father, in which the father took the child to his hometown without the mother’s consent.
“The unilateral removal of a child and upbringing without the mother’s consent should not be reflected in final custody decisions, but rather considered a disadvantage,” the Incheon Family Court ruled in January.
forestjs@heraldcorp.com
