Why Is Divorce Still Hard Even After Attempted Spousal Murder？

Why Is Divorce Still Hard Even After Attempted Spousal Murder？

On the morning of September 26, 2025, the divorce case of Wang Nuannuan (a pseudonym) — the real-life prototype of the film Lost in the Stars and the victim in the "Chinese pregnant woman pushed off a cliff in Thailand by her husband"（happened in 2019） case — was heard at the People's Court of Qinhuai District, Nanjing City.

In fact, in June 2023, after trial by the Supreme Court of Thailand, the defendant Yu Modong was sentenced to more than 33 years in prison in the final judgment.

Many people are confused: Since Yu Modong has been convicted of attempted premeditated murder in Thailand, why can't the breakdown of the marital relationship be directly confirmed? Why is it so hard to get a divorce from a murderer?

For the time being, the information available to us is limited. We can only provide an analysis based on the current legal provisions:

I. Foreign Criminal Judgments Do Not Directly Validate Divorce in China

Even though Yu Modong has been sentenced for attempted premeditated murder in Thailand, the breakdown of the marital relationship cannot be directly confirmed. This stems from the principle of judicial sovereignty and the rule that public law does not have direct cross-border effect.

Criminal judgments are highly punitive. Currently, countries generally do not recognize the civil and commercial effect of foreign criminal judgments within their own jurisdictions. According to Article 298 of China's Civil Procedure Law, the foreign judgments that China recognizes and enforces are limited to "effective civil and commercial judgments". This means that even if Yu Modong was convicted in Thailand, the verdict can only prove his criminal act — it cannot be directly used as "presumed evidence" for divorce in China. The domestic court must still re-examine the status of the marital relationship.

II. Multiple Obstacles in Foreign-Related Litigation Procedures

Wang Nuannuan's case is known as "China's first divorce case where the defendant is serving a sentence abroad". Procedural obstacles are concentrated in three aspects:

1. Difficulties in Document Service: 

Thailand is not a party to the Hague Service Convention.      Litigation documents must be transmitted through diplomatic channels,      which takes much longer than in ordinary cases.

2.Jurisdiction and Hearing Challenges: 

In accordance with Article 13 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, the case is under the jurisdiction of the Qinhuai District Court in Nanjing. However, Yu Modong cannot appear in court as he is serving his sentence in Thailand, and Chinese judges are also unable to hold a hearing in Thailand. Eventually, the trial can only be conducted via video, resulting in extremely high costs for procedural coordination.

3.No Precedents to Follow: 

There has been no prior judicial practice for cases where both parties are Chinese citizens, their assets are in China, and the defendant is serving a sentence overseas. The court must repeatedly demonstrate the application of the law, leading to a prolonged trial period.

III. Requirement for Independent Review of Divorce Standards

In China, the only standard for divorce is "the genuine breakdown of marital affection". Even if there is an act of attempted murder, the court must still confirm the breakdown based on evidence. Article 11 of the Several Specific Opinions on How People's Courts Determine the Genuine Breakdown of Marital Affection in Trying Divorce Cases(promulgated by the Supreme People's Court in 1989 and still in effect) clearly stipulates: "If one party is lawfully sentenced to a long-term imprisonment, or their illegal or criminal acts have seriously harmed the marital affection", it shall be deemed that the marital affection has genuinely broken down, and a divorce judgment may be granted.

This provision contains two key logical layers:

1. Criminal acts do not necessarily equal the breakdown of marital      affection: 

It is necessary to      distinguish between "criminal acts" and "harm to marital      affection". Even if a criminal act is proven, if it has no direct      connection to the marital relationship (e.g., duty-related crimes,      property crimes), further evidence of its impact on the marital affection      is still required.

2."Serious harm" requires substantive proof: 

The judicial interpretation does not list specific types of crimes; instead, it requires the court to make a judgment based on the facts of the case. In subsequent judicial cases, the Supreme People's Court has clarified that for such cases, the court must examine elements such as "whether the motive for the crime arises from marital conflicts" and "whether the act has destroyed the foundation of marital trust" — these are the core contents that Wang Nuannuan needs to prove.

From a legal perspective, the "difficulty" in Wang Nuannuan's divorce case essentially results from the combination of the lag in foreign-related judicial cooperation and the rigor in determining marital relationships. The trial process of this case has also established a judicial thinking for similar cases — "first resolve procedural obstacles through diplomatic channels, then review substantive elements in accordance with domestic law" — providing an important reference for subsequent similar disputes.

Note： We also provide Chinese version of this post today.