Divorce Attorney Shin – K-drama Episode 10 Recap & Review


Episode 10 of Divorce Attorney Shin begins with Geum-hui and Chairman Seo meeting down by the lake. They discuss Sung-han and their potential divorce, and while Chairman Seo is confident he can change her mind, it’s very obvious that he can’t. It’s a brief chat in truth, but it’s big news as the public get hold of what’s going on and reporters run with it. The journos deep dive into their past and current home life, trying to bring up as much as they can.

There’s also news brewing with Seo-jin, whom we know from the end of the last episode is on course to start up her own channel on YouTube. She even has her own studio set up too, complete with mics and several different cameras. Seo-jin is still nervous though but she soon leans into it, managing to get a good deal of subscribers that love her material.

Sung-han prepares for his big case, speaking to Geum-hui who reminds him that he’s up against six attorneys and this won’t be an easy task. He has a strategy though, and plays Beethoven. The significance of this comes from the story behind this composition, correlating to how he’s going to handle this.

This entire affair is hanging in the balance, especially as Yeong-ju is put in a compromising position. She needs the Chairman to win this, with the promise of gaining extra shares if she does. If Yeong-ju is on the losing side, the Chairman promises that she’ll go back to “the life that she deserves”.

Sung-han’s strategy involves figuring out what Chairman Seo is going to do, and he discusses this with Jeong-sik and Heung-geun, realizing that he’s probably going to dig into Geum-hui’s living expenses, and spin the fact she’s living in Hawaii as a bad thing.

The crux of the issue comes from the value of a plot of land, something that Geum-hui admits to Sung-han raised in value over time and Daehan would not be where it is today without it. Geum-hui belieeves she should be given 20%, given it was instrumental in the company’s current success.

Geum-hui meets with Sung-han at a beautiful restaurant, where she hands over a journal full of details surrounding Chairman Seo’s ex lovers and all the places they met. It dates all the way back to 1994. She paid all of them off to stay silent, even going so far as to pay a 23 year old to keep quiet and pay for her studies abroad. The reason she’s picked Sung-han is because of his history and just how talented he is as an attorney.

Before we get to that, there’s some more cute moments between Hyeong-geun and So-yeon, as they discuss meeting up and spending more time together. Seo-jin suggests they go camping together, and So-yeon messages him to confirm as much. Now, in the wake of this, Seo-jin checks the messages on her video and notices a few discussing how Hyeon-u would be ashamed of her videos.

This shatters Seo-jin’s confidence completely. Seo-jin discusses how she’s feeling with Sae-bom, and admits that she’s concerned that by staying strong for Hyeon-u and confronting this commenter, it’s going to put her son in danger. Seo-jin is dead-set on finding out who “lifesucksanyway” is all the same, no matter the cost.

Yu-seok shows up at the Jeong-sik real estate shop and starts antagonizing Jeong-sik. However, he grabs a spray can and forces him off the premises. As fate would have it, someone happens to be taking photos from afar, a guy working for Yeong-ju. As she looks at the photos, she wonders just what he was doing there.

After learning about Geum-hui’s torrid past, Sung-han pores over the different documents and bits of evidence he has, wondering just how to move forward with his case. She wants as much money as possible, and given how much Daehan is now worth, it’s definitely going to be a lot – but only if he wins.

Hyeong-Geun heads out on his camping date with So-yeon, and the pair roast marshmallows together. Hyeong-geun admits he’s a bit rough around the edges but So-yeon confirms that this is what she finds attractive in him. As they talk, who should come out of the nearby tent but Sung-han and Jeong-sik. They’ve been spying on them this whole time and the latter, in his desperation to use the toilet, is spotted.

Eventually the quartet do sit together and eat, sharing banter and honestly, these bits of dialogue are easily the stand-out moments of the show.

We then cut to the next day, with Sung-han meeting Chairman Seo’s six attorneys. They decide to “break the ice” and get right down to business, with Sung-han bringing up the Chairman’s multiple affairs. Of course, there’s no evidence of this beyond circumstantial stuff. Well, that is until he hands out a whole bunch of photocopies for the journal. This catches them off-guard completely as they decide to try and verify these claims.

Meanwhile, Seo-jin and Choi track down the culprit behind “lifesucksanyway” and it happens to be a 14 year old girl. The girl admits that she’s hated Seo-jin for a long time, off the back of her love for Hyeon-u and how hard done by she feels with her life.

Seo-jin decides not to turn the girl in to the police though, and instead she turns him over to Choi, deciding that he can help. It’s an act of compassion that will hopefully turn the tide.

Gi-yeong shows up that afternoon to Sung-han’s office, and asks him for help. He wants the lawyer to help defend the young boy. Sung-han promises to take care of everything and hugs him tightly.

The Episode Review

Divorce Attorney Shin returns with another warm slice of law drama pie, delivering on that blend of humour and drama. This final case involving Geum-hui is likely to expand and grow over the next couple of chapters, while the comradery between Hyeong-geun, Jeong-sik and Sung-han is partly why this show works so well.

There have been a few references to Thirty-Nine this weekend too, which is an amusing observation and it’s quite an interesting comparison to be honest, as both shows have very different outcomes in the way they portray their friendships – and Attorney Shin certainly comes out on top.

This chapter’s highlight comes from that camping scene, which was a definite winner. Everything is left hanging in the balance for the final two chapters now, which promise to bring this one to a close on a high.

Previous Episode

Next Episode

You can read our full season review for Divorce Attorney Shin here!

  • Episode Rating

10 thoughts on “Divorce Attorney Shin – K-drama Episode 10 Recap & Review”

  1. Frankly, in terms of trust, I do have to agree with the 14 year old girl, but not for the video, but for what the video represents, namely his mother forgetting about the school event and not being there for him when he needed her because she was with her lover (ironically, his abusive father was the one that was there for him at the hospital). Her choosing to have an affair instead of divorcing the guy and taking the kid with him, which made the kid’s life even harder because, as he recorded in the diary, leaving him alone with someone she knew to be an abusive sub-human. All of which reveal her true priorities in practice, despite what cheap words she might spout to the contrary: talk is cheap, ultimately actions are what counts. This might not be abuse, but it is certainly neglect. It is a breach of trust, and after being left with his father while she was increasingly not there (also thanks to the affair), plus her simply… forgetting her promise about the school and not answering when he needed her at the hospital, because she was with her lover… that’s a breach of trust, and the neglect shouldn’t have been solved in ep2 with a simple apology. No long term trust issues? No psychological issues comparable to the event where he had to be brought to the hospital? Suddenly, because of an apology? His father was even worse, in his abuse, of course. Which makes the fact he was the one there for him at the hospital, while his mother was unreachable even worse in terms of breach of trust -in terms of what he expected of his respective parents-. No, like in Thirty Nine the topic of neglect was resolved too conveniently with a simple apology. I do wish the show would have, realistically, focused more on that and made it more of a challenge, in that respect the video that was shared online distracted from that topic and most of the challenges had nothing to do with the breach of trust, but with issues having to do with her reputation now that the truth of her actions was out in public (via the video and then the trial).

  2. The thing is, if her son feels, correctly, betrayed because she was sleeping with her lover and wasn’t there for him when he was at the hospital, and before that she forgot the school event, and beyond that she was often missing from home and leaving him with his abusive, sub-human father, which she didn’t choose to divorce, taking him away from that abusive situation, instead of having this affair that if anything made her son’s life worse -because she was out of the house a lot, as per his diary, and she was not there for him when he was hurt, and forgot the school event-… well, if her son, as I was saying, felt betrayed, then the 14 years old pointing out this true fact is not really the problem -it wouldn’t hurt anywhere near as much as it does, if it was not true, and what is making her son suffer in that respect is essentially her betrayal of his trust-.

  3. Frankly, thinking about public figures (Clinton, Wheener, Bezos, etc.), it’s one thing to be unfairly maligned based on false information, it’s quite another to have one’s reputation match one’s actual actions and being called out on atrocious behavior. Sure, we are going with the “husband was a monster and deserved the pain and humiliation”, but that is quite different from, say, neglecting one’s kid, and frankly, not getting a divorce and taking the kid away from an abusive situation instead (she was quite happy leaving him alone with an abusive subhuman, to paraphrase her phrasing, as evidenced by the kid’s diary -and while the focus had been on his father’s abuse, her absence was also an issue there… Again, talking about someone that would forget a school meeting and be unreachable when her kid needed her because she was with her lover. The abusive environment suddenly became a problem for her when her husband wanted a divorce and she wanted to get custody). Frankly, had her husband not been this irredeemable, monstrous abuser, but just a regular guy, he would have very much deserved to have custody, and as things stands, on account of her neglect, I really wish they had a relative to leave the kid to instead. In any case, I don’t really what I perceive as her hiding behind the kid and using him as a shield to avoid criticism herself (some quite unfair, some just appalling -the sex tape was taken and distributed without her consent, and she certainly shouldn’t be propositioned by randos on the internet), but some quite valid -the 14 years old pointing out how appalling her behavior had been was directionally on point, though less focus on the tape and more on the neglect would have been appropriate, and she herself acknowledged said neglect, and apologized to the kid, not that in my eyes an apology is in any way sufficient in cases such as the husband’s abusive behavior, and, in my opinion, in neglecting one’s kid to the point of leaving them alone with a subhuman abuser, forgetting important school events that mattered to the kid, and not being there for him when he needed her, because she was with her lover, with the abusive environment becoming a concern only when her husband wanted a divorce and she wanted custody… the fact that she didn’t get a divorce and take the kid away a long time ago, instead of starting this affair that in no way, shape or form helped the kid, and in fact made his situation even worse because she was not at home for long periods of time, as per his diary, and forgot and missed the school meeting, and he couldn’t reach her when he was hurt and needed her, because she was with her lover-.

    Incidentally, “husband was a monster and deserved the pain and humiliation” means that this was not a “mistake” as in “everybody makes mistakes”: if you ask her, in terms of what she did *to her husband* there is no regret nor does she consider it a mistake, as for neglecting and hurting her kid, that was very much not something that could be minimized and euphemized as “everyone makes mistakes”… no, as the attoneys said in the first episodes, not everyone cheats, quite the contrary -and they are exposed to such people more than most, so if anything their perception would be more skewed than the norm-, and neglect is very much not something that could be solved with such a cheap excuse and apology, nor were her actions and decisions, over one year, a “mistake”, they were deliberate choices -also choices about what not to do, such as not getting a divorce and taking the kid away instead, but being all too happy to leave him alone with an abusive person she considered less than human while she was off with her lover, as evidenced by the kid’s diary complaining about her frequent absences, when not forgetting about school events she promised to attend to and being unavailable when her kid was hurt and needed her, because she was with her lover… none of those being “mistakes everybody makes”.

  4. Well, the 14 years hold can console herself with the knowledge that this woman neglected her son as well, parking him in the hands of an abusive father that she considered less than human, and not being at home a lot of the time, while she was off with her lover -as remarked by her son in his diary-, even forgetting about her son’s school event and being unavailable when he needed her when he got hurt, because she was busy sleeping with her lover. If not outright abuse, that’s at minimum neglect. The abusive father became a concern for her in terms of the kid only when he initiated a divorce and she wanted to fight for custody, before that she didn’t make any attempt to divorce him and take the kid away -again, she was more than happy to not be in the house and have the kid be alone with said abusive father, who incidentally was the one that went to the hospital when the kid got hurt, and she was unreachable because she was busy sleeping with her lover… a mistake in characterization in my eyes, because given that the characterization was him being an irredeemable monster that cared for the kid even less than she did, I found it strident that he would be the one there for him when he got hurt and he needed him, while she was busy with her lover after forgetting the school event in the first place… even if we wanted to keep her as a neglectful mother, they could have at least made the father unreachable as well, maybe because he was busy with an affair of his own, or at work… though using work as an excuse is still better than a lover, so maybe the latter would have still been a faux pax in terms of the characterization they were going with for the guy… I felt the same way about the notion of him selling his house to pay for her brother’s debts: mixed messages when the characterization was that of an irredeemable monster that the viewer couldn’t empathise with at all, which was the whole point given the wife/mother’s role in the story-.

    Frankly, I found it rather ridiculous that she, an adult, could neglect her child as described above, and essentially not care about him vis a vis the abusive father until the father initiated the divorce, and it came time to talk about custody, while the 14 years old is supposed to care about a comment directed at her potentially hurting her son if he read it (which he shouldn’t have because she, the adult, was supposed to control him media consumption). Quite frankly, the gratuitous abuse and the inappropriate sexual propositions are one thing, the 14 year hold correctly calling her out for her atrocious behavior as a mother, that she herself acknowledged and apologized for to her son, is quite another -though the focus ought to have been on the neglect, rather than the sex tape-. Ultimately, it’s one thing to be maligned based on untrue facts, i.e. if the message of her husband being scum that deserved this treatment did not propagate, it’s quite another thing to have one’s reputation match one’s actions, and in this case she was, very much, a neglectful mother, and she did, in fact, have an affair -it’s just that her husband was so horrible that the kind of humiliation and emotional trauma that would ordinarily be horrifying to heap on one’s partner were a positive sign because he was the kind of person that deserved to be hurt and humiliated in such a manner-. In that respect, the “everybody makes mistakes” bit is even more foolish and false than it seems on its face, because as the attoneys acknowledged in the first episodes, no, not everybody has affairs, quite the contrary, and no, in this case it was very much not a mistake, it’s something she chose to do over one year, and in fact if you ask her whether she is sorry and considers what she had done *to her husband* a mistake, she is clearly completely unrepentant about that part and does not consider it a mistake (imho it was a mistake not to get a divorce and taking the kid away a long time ago instead was). The mistake was her neglecting her kid as described above, and essentially the fact that the kid’s father was abusive starting to matter to her only when the man initiated a divorce and she had to fight for custody, were the mistakes. Not getting a divorce and taking the kid away a long time ago instead, was a mistake. And neglect is certainly neither something that could be minimized as “a mistake”, nor something that “everybody does”. In fact, it was appalling, and frankly one wishes they had a grandma like the 14 year old did that could take care of the kid instead -had her husband not been even more abusive and appalling, and had been a regular guy, he should and would have gotten custody instead, her behavior being utterly appalling and her coming out on top only because her husband was even worse-.

  5. Can’t really stand the self serving cynicism of “everybody makes mistakes”… they most definitely *do not*, and even the divorce attoneys (Shin and the female lawyer) acknowledged that this was by no means what everybody did, utterly expected behavior. And if they have this opinion despite being in a profession where it’s more ubiquitous than the norm, then surely a rando has no excuse.

  6. Quite frankly, not sure in what world it makes more sense to track down every single person writing malicious comments, rather than blocking their ability to post and, in terms of her son, not allowing him to read those comments online. I mean, the guy was scrolling through them with zero supervision, not sure it’s up to the 14 year old to refrain from pointing out the things she, an adult, factually did, only because it’s unpleasant to face the fact that yes, she essentially was not there for her son, was always out, and left him with an abusive man, and was not there for the school meeting she forgot about, nor was she reachable when her son got hurt, because she was with her lover, and all along there was the chance of her affair getting to the public, even without her lover or husband’s actions, and in fact she expected to be caught, and it would have affected her son, and she didn’t care enough not to carry on said year long affair. Unpleasant, but all perfectly true.

    Again, not saying that they can’t apply whatever content moderation they want, but in no way is that defamatory (because it’s true), or threatening, and she is a public figure. It’s simply unreasonable to track down every poster that doesn’t like her and shares such an opinion, and while they might be stopped from expressing their opinion, because it’s a private company and they can censor whomever they please, it would make much more sense for her to simply monitor her son’s internet consumption than to track down everybody that doesn’t like her. Though, again, I am 100% onboard with the “husband deserved it” part -though the kid was another matter, and a side of the equation which was acknowledged in the beginning and is now essentially taboo to point out if you want to avoid gaslighting-.

  7. To be honest:
    1. The comments against her were pretty tame.
    2. Not sure about tracking down the commenter in terms of the implications on privacy, given that there were no threats, etc.
    3. Not really convinced about the notion that the 14 year old girl should have refrained because of the woman’s son: after all, it was not the 14 year old girl that was never at home and left him in the hands of an abusive man, and forgot about the school event, and was unreachable when he got hurt, because she was with her lover. She was the one that did all that. Pointing this fact out politely and without insulting her would count as criticism, or does everyone have to act as if she did nothing objectionable? And, again, it’s one thing to say that her husband deserved it, the kid is another matter entirely, and normalizing cheating tout cour is something else too (and not sure how that was okay, but saying that her son was to be pitied -which Shin in essence also said in the first episodes when he correctly remarked that both his parents were pretty horrible-, was not).
    4. On that note, her son is left with basically no supervision, it’s not clear to me why he should be allowed to look through those comments on the internet in the first place at that age.

    In other words, she was a public figure, and it’s one thing to ask for politeness, another to pretend the public to have a uniform opinion of her (something impossible, imho, given people disagree even about the most uncontroversial things), another to track down a teenager that made critical but, frankly, not really defamatory or threatening comments… which would have been different from content moderation, which could have taken an arbitrary form -though, deleting all critical comments would kind of prove the girl’s point-. Again, it’s one thing if we want to “special case” this by referring to the fact that her husband was a complete monster and therefore you could essentially do anything to him and it would be a net good, but that’s another argument.

  8. I would say that the “I feel bad for the kid” comment was completely on point. Unless one wants to simply forget the fact that she basically was never at home and left him in the hands of a man that she knew to be abusive -the reason she wanted to get custody-, and that she forgot the school meeting and was unreachable when he tried to contact her when he got hurt and was brought to the hospital (none of which is behavior I would brush off as “everybody makes mistakes”, in that it was not a mistake, but a series of deliberate decisions over a year, and in that no, not everybody would behave in this manner, divorce was an option, and this is not behavior to normalize tout cour… again, it’s one thing to make the argument that the husband deserved this treatment, it’s another thing to pretend that this treatment was the norm -it was appalling, it’s just that it happened to someone that deserved it… and this is ignoring the neglect of the son-). I am 100% in agreement with Shin in the first episodes when he pointed out that both of the kid’s parents were pretty terrible, and in fact if I were to choose I would choose not to be with either of them. The kid getting past his trauma and being able to live with his mother so soon, apparently without any psychological consequence of note -he was hospitalized, but after the trial he was suddenly a-okay overall? Very convenient plot-wise, not sure how realistic-.

  9. I would say that it’s one thing to simply have a policy of not commenting on celebrities’ lives, and even just, ignoring facts such as her never being at home and the kid being forced to stay in the company of a father she knew to be abusive, and forgetting about her son’s parent-teacher meeting and not being there when he got hurt and brought to the hospital because she was sleeping with her lover, making the argument that in terms of what she did to her husband, the guy was 100% undeserving of loyalty (which he didn’t get, in fact), and hurting him was a net positive. What I am not onboard about is pretending that in general what she had done would have been no biggie had her husband been someone that one could empathize with on any level: factually speaking, absent his abuse, her behavior would have been completely appalling, it’s just that by comparison she comes out on top given that he is shown to be unworthy of the loyalty that she does not provide, and cares even less about their son than she does -and she not only essentially was not at home, leaving him in the hands of someone she knew to be abusive, but didn’t answer his call when he got hurt, after forgetting she even needed to be at the school event, because she was with her lover-. In other words, it’s one thing to say “her husband deserved it” and “special case” this behavior, it’s quite another to pretend that this is behavior everybody engages in and essentially normalize lying and betraying the trust of one’s spouse -cheating-, tout cour (i.e. “everybody makes mistakes”… well, it was not a mistake, but a choice, or a series of decisions, over one year; she had every chance to divorce her husband, which would have actually solved her and her kid’s predicament, while leaving him alone in the company of a man she knew to be abusive, which is the reason she didn’t want him to have custody, while she was off with her lover and unavailable even when her son needed her, were very much not the only options, though they do give a clear indication of her priorities in practice -as opposed to the cheap talk, action is what counts-; and no, not everybody makes this mistake -there is mistake and mistaken, and this was not a necessary consequence of the situation, divorce was very much an option and the only sensible thing to do for the kid, who she forgot at home, or at the hospital, it turns out, while being with her lover-. Again, “husband was scum and deserved it” is one argument, the kid is another matter entirely, and normalizing cheating tout cour with the untrue claim that everybody behaves in this manner is another thing entirely -something she chooses to do, over and over again, for a year, is in no way configurable as a mistake, it’s a deliberate decision-.

  10. Not really on board with some of the comments she read: “everyone makes mistakes”… self serving cynicism? Plainly, not everyone makes this mistake, as evidenced by the lawyers themselves in the first two episodes, and absolutely nothing about her husband’s abusive behaviour and the need to get out of there was helped by her affair. Not sure that forgetting her own son’s parent teacher meeting and being unavailable while he was brought to the hospital because she was with her lover was a “mistake” or something that should be brushed aside in this manner. A year long affair is not a mistake in any sense of the word, it’s a choice.

    As Shin said in the second episode, they were both pretty appalling parents, and her husband being completely nuts is the one thing that makes her come out on top -otherwise, someone that by her own kid’s admission was never at home and was not there for him when she needed her, would be pretty appalling… for that matter, being out with her lover and leaving her son alone with her abusive husband, rather than divorcing the guy and taking the kid, are not exactly things that every mother would do in her place… despite what she might say, factually speaking she did prioritize her affair over her son, and carried on the affair while knowing she would be discovered sooner or later-.

    Again, this is very different from saying that the husband didn’t deserve any loyalty on account of his abusive behaviour towards her and her son: there, the claim was that hurting the husband was not a mistake, but a net positive (but I don’t think that there is any universe where forgetting about her son at school and being awol while he was brought to the hospital because she was busy sleeping with her lover would be acceptable).

    Again, this all hinges on her husband being an irredeemable monster undeserving of any empathy. And, I suppose, the detail about her forgetting her son’s meeting in the first place and not being there for him when he got hurt, and never being at home and leaving him with her husband, were not known to the public. Again, one thing is the husband, another the kid. Setting aside what she did with the kid, which she “forgot” about, which was indefensible, I can respect the claim that she was right doing what she did to her husband because he was an irredeemable monster that didn’t deserve any loyalty -and got none-. I cannot respect calling it a mistake and essentially normalizing cheating in its entirety, pretending that it’s something that essentially everyone does -a completely self serving cynicism-, while plainly not all cases are the same, and even in her circumstances plenty of people would have acted differently, and she herself could have acted differently and gotten a divorce.

    Actually, it seems irresponsible to leave the kid a second more with her sociopathic husband, and the fact that unless he found out the affair and wanted to divorce her she would have carried on staying with her husband and seeing her lover behind his back, something that in no way, shape or form made things better in terms of her husband’s abusive behavior -in fact, by her son’s own admission, he would be left alone at home with the guy, which made him even more unhappy-, does seem crazy to me.

    Again, 100% on board with “the husband is irredeemable scum that deserved what he got”, but that’s quite different from pretending that cheating is no biggie anyway -in the show itself we see cheaters being lambasted, and probably she wouldn’t have been so keep being on the receiving end, as probably the commenter that tried to normalize lying and betraying one’s partner-.

Leave a comment