Court Dismisses Lawsuit to Lift Attachment on Cheongdam-dong Building Suspected as Nam Wook's Hidden Asset

The corporate entity owning a building in Cheongdam-dong, suspected of being a concealed asset of attorney Nam Wook—who is implicated in the Daejang-dong development preferential treatment scandal—has lost a lawsuit filed to lift the prosecution's attachment preserving the property.

The 47th Civil Settlement Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Ha Seong-won) ruled against the plaintiff today (October 29) in a third-party objection lawsuit filed by Company A against the state.

Company A is known to have as its co-representatives the wife of an associate of Nam and a family member of accountant Jeong Young-hak.

In 2022, prosecutors determined that the real owner of the building under Company A's name located in Cheongdam-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, was Nam and requested a provisional seizure for forfeiture (attachment preservation), which the court accepted.

The scale of the attachment preservation is reportedly about 101 billion won.

In response, Company A filed a lawsuit in May seeking to lift the attachment preservation.

Company A argued that the Cheongdam-dong building is substantially owned by Company A and is not Nam's property, and therefore the attachment preservation should be lifted.

Meanwhile, Nam's side has also requested the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to lift the provisional attachment on a building in Sinsa-gu, Gangnam-gu, which is suspected of being under a borrowed name.

Previously, prosecutors requested attachment preservation for the assets of Daejang-dong private developers, including Nam, and obtained approval from the court, freezing 207 billion won worth of assets such as land and buildings held in their real and borrowed names.

However, as prosecutors gave up their appeal, the opportunity to contest the remaining amount in the second trial has disappeared, excluding the forfeiture of 42.8 billion won for Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu, and 8.1 billion won for Yoo Dong-gyu, former head of planning at Seongnam Development Corporation, which were recognized by the first trial.

Because the prosecution gave up its appeal, the second trial cannot sentence the defendant to a harsher punishment than the first trial.

Nam was not sentenced to forfeiture in the first trial.

(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.