Obviously Daddy Cha's words convinced the judge and all three siblings rushes home after receiving a lawsuit notice from the court.
However, Daddy Cha has chosen to disappear leaving a bewildered Auntie Cha to deal with his emotional kids.
Young Sul is convinced that Daddy Cha's sudden change of behavior is due to Miss Ko but Auntie Cha is not convinced... but she seems a bit shaken in her conviction.
Daddy Cha yells that after years of being ignored by his kids he is finally going to do whatever he wants. After yelling to his heart's content, Daddy Cha goes back to his room shaken from being able to say everything that has been piling up in his heart.
Kang Shim finally takes the time to figure out that Wook Tak is Daddy Cha's lawyer and marches right over to Wook Tak's office and throws the court notice in his face.
Dressed like some Asian maffia, Tae Joo warns Wook Tak "I will do what ever it takes to protect Kang Shim from you."
Stunned as she watches Tae Joo leaves with a swagger, Kang Shim mutters "Why can't I be surrounded by normal men?"
Young Sul joins Kang Shim and snickers "There is no "normal" man. It is by living with women that the men become human." Ha Ha, I love Young Sul brand of relationship advice.
In reality, Eun Ho has set his eyes on Tae Joo as his chosen investor. Eun Ho shows up at Tae Joo's apartment uninvited, starts wolfing down Tae Joo's breakfast and tosses Tae Joo his investment report. Grumbling at having his breakfast stolen, Tae Joo is nevertheless impressed by Eun Ho's investment report.
From a conversation between the chef and Seo Wool we find out that Seo Wool has actually promised the chef to take on Dal Bong's workload in order to teach Dal Bong a lesson.
Thanks to a slip from Young Sul, Kang Shim confirms her suspicion that Miss Ko is the cause of Daddy Cha's sudden changes.
Auntie Cha tries to talk to Daddy Cha about his treatment of the kids, but Daddy Cha just coldly tell her "You need to choose which side you will be on. This is war now."
Overhearing the conversation between the two, Seo Wool chimes in that she is on Daddy Cha's side. Seo Wool assures Auntie Cha that someone like Daddy Cha who considers his kids as his whole world must have a good reason to do the things he is doing.
Not a lawyer by any means, but at least in US, a judgement from the court is REQUIRED before some's wages can be garnished. At this point in the story, lawyers from both sides haven't even met yet, let alone seen the face of a judge, I am really puzzled how Wook Tak can possibly garnish the kids' wages. Wouldn't the Korea justice system be chaotic if it simply require the accuse to file a law suit to start garnishing the defendants' wage without ever going as far as a seeing a judge?
Barely suppressing his anger, Kang Jae tells Daddy Cha "Fine, Father, we'll do it your way and take it all the way to court. But we will also use this opportunity to clean up our parent child relationship."
Daddy Cha "Fine, let's do that."
I guess is really war. Can I just say first that I feel really badly for Dal Bong. Out of the three kids Dal Bong is an innocent bystander that gets caught in the cross fire. Sure, he is a young man who really needs to learn how to be a good son BUT Seo Wool is teaching him and he does change whenever she yells at him to do better. Given time, I am pretty sure Dal Bong with Seo Wool's help would be a fine son. His greed over the inheritance is simply a mistake of youth and thoughtless thinking. Of course, now that Seo Wool has also taken it on herself to teach him a lesson I am sure things are going to get interesting.
In this episode I think the writer is trying pretty hard to let the viewer know that Daddy Cha does have a reason for the lawsuit and is in fact using it as a teaching tool. I see what the writer is trying to get across but I still have a huge problem with the lawsuit.
A reader comments in Episode 24 recap that he/she doesn't see anything wrong with Daddy Cha suing his kids and that comment really sent me back to the drawing board to try to figure out why I have such a problem with it.
Let's start with what I wouldn't have a problem with:
- Daddy Cha calmly tells his kids "Thanks for your suggestion about the store and house, but I am going to refuse your offer. By the way, you should know my feeling were really hurt because...."
- Daddy Cha writes the kids out off his will and does whatever he wants with his money and property.
- Tells Kang Shim and Kang Jae to stop thinking they can live at his house for free and start contributing or just simply kicks them out.
- Tells his kids about all the pant up anger for how they treated him.
Why I have a problem with the lawsuit:
- Daddy Cha hasn't even tried talking to his kids yet. In his own words to the judge he has never scolded his kids so how does he know that his kids wouldn't change if he just tells them why he is disappointed in them and how he wants them to change?
- Following the previous thought. Because a father has never bothered to teach his kids how to be grateful so now the court has to do it for him??
- The lawsuit is not about Kang Jae's suggestion about the inheritance since that whole thing stopped the moment Daddy Cha refused the idea. So the lawsuit is about the kids being bad sons and daughter, therefore Daddy Cha is demanding all the money he spent on them after the age of 20.
- In another words, Daddy Cha is saying because you are not my ideal of how a son and daughter should act so any money that I spent on you on my own free will back in the days I want it back now.
If a lawsuit such as this really go through then every parent and maybe every child would have cause to sue. Take one step further, anyone in any form of relationship would have a case on their hand if the other party (ie. spouse, girlfriend/boyfriend/ ex-bestfriend) is a disappointment to them. After all, a spousal relationship really has more teeth in this argument since a parent-child relationship does have to deal with the issue that if your kids turns out badly then a parent do have to bear some responsibility for not teaching them well.
This lawsuit really is just one giant ball of confusion. How can one even define unfilial behavior? What if the next parent thinks a child who refuses to marry the person of their choosing or study the major of their choosing is being unfilial? This just seems like a giant nightmare for any country's court system.
Anyhow, my rambling is done. So I will just say despite my disagreement with the lawsuit, I am still quite intrigued to see... well, what happens to the Cha family.