ENGLISH

- The property subject to division is, in principle, property amassed in cooperation between the spouses during their marriage, which is a joint property whose provenance is unclear between the spouses. Judicial precedent holds that property actually acquired by cooperation between spouses is subject to division even if it is in the name of one spouse or in a title trust in the name of a third party (Supreme Court Judgment 96Meu1434 announced on April 10, 1998). Spousal joint property includes housing, bank deposits, stock, receivables, etc., and any debt is deducted from such a property.

- Property owned individually by a spouse before the marriage and property acquired by a spouse by inheritance, gift, or bequest during the marriage, etc. is a property unique to one spouse (Article 830(1) of the Civil Act) and is not, in principle, subject to division. Provided that if the other spouse contributed to the maintenance and increase of such particular property, the amount of increase may be included in the division of property (e.g., Supreme Court Judgment 93Meu1020 announced on May 13, 1994; Supreme Court Judgment 97Meu1486·1493 announced on February 13, 1998; Supreme Court Judgment 2002Seu36 announced on August 28, 2002).

- Judicial precedent rules that retirement pay, pension, etc. already received at the time of divorce may be subject to division (Supreme Court Judgment 94Meu1713,1720 announced on May 23, 1995; Supreme Court Judgment 94Meu1584 announced on March 28, 1995); a pension payment claim that was potentially in existence as of the close of trial hearings and the realistic evaluation of whose economic value as property was possible may be included in property subject to division even if the pension payment was not actually received because the spouse was still employed at the time of divorce, with the claim in the amount of the retirement payment expected to be received at the time of the close of trial hearings if the spouse had retired at that point being subject to division (Supreme Court Judgment 2013Meu2250 announced on July 16, 2014).

- If one spouse bore debt to a third party during the marriage, it may be subject to division if it is debt for the amassment of spousal joint property (for instance, a loan to buy a house where they would reside together) or debt for everyday household expenses (for instance to purchase everyday goods) (e.g., Supreme Court Judgment 2002Seu36 of August 28, 2002; Supreme Court Judgment 96Meu1397 announced on June 11, 1999; Supreme Court Judgment 97Meu1486,1493 announced on February 13, 1998).

- If a spouse who was saddled with debt as part of economic responsibilities seeks divorce, the debt may also be subject to division of property. In an action for divorce and the division of property brought by a wife who had supported a husband with no income, the Supreme Court ruled that, “if, as a result of examining the status of property by deducting negative property (debt) from the positive property, etc., the other party in the claim for the division of property is found to hold more positive property or less negative property than his due, division of property is possible both to distribute the positive property and share the negative property nor is a claim for division of property to be dismissed as a matter of course in the latter case. (Supreme Court En Banc Judgment 2010Meu4071 announced on June 20, 2013).”

- Judicial precedent rules that where a spouse acquired skills or qualifications such as lawyer, doctor, accountant, professor, etc. with the other spouse’s support during the marriage with the potential for a high level of future income, the future expected income, etc. from such skills or qualification may be considered in determining the amount and method of property division (Supreme Court Judgment 98Meu213 announced on June 12, 1998).