The Bar Association and LawTalk Face the Calm Before the Storm Ahead of the Constitutional Court's Decision on 'Lawyer Advertising Regulations'

Bar Association Revises Regulations Undermining Platform Services Like Lawyer Fee Comparisons
LawTalk: "Creating a 'LawTalk Ban Law' Restricts Access to Lawyer Information, Violating Constitution"

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] As the conflict between the Korean Bar Association and the legal platform Lotoc reaches its peak, the Constitutional Court's decision on the Bar Association's "Regulations on Lawyer Advertising," which restrict lawyer advertisements, will be announced on the 26th.

On the 25th, insiders and outsiders in the legal community predicted that depending on the Constitutional Court's decision, the Bar Association's sanctions related to lawyer advertising could be nullified, leading to a major environmental change in the legal market.

According to the Constitutional Court's decision, the conflict between the Bar Association and Lotoc is expected to be resolved for the time being. If the Constitutional Court accepts the constitutional complaint filed by Lotoc, Lotoc is expected to continue operating its existing services provided to consumers while expanding its scope. Moreover, it may gain an advantage in future disputes with the Bar Association. On the other hand, if the Constitutional Court dismisses the case, Lotoc's core services such as lawyer fee estimates will effectively be banned, putting the business at risk of significant downsizing.

In May last year, the Bar Association revised the regulations on lawyer advertising by adding a clause prohibiting "any act that indicates or provides services related to the duties of lawyers by persons who are not lawyers, or any act that may mislead consumers into believing they are lawyers."

They also newly established clauses banning advertisements that "promote estimates, bidding, comparisons, etc., regarding lawyer fees that may disrupt fair order in accepting cases" and advertisements that "predict outcomes of investigations by investigative agencies, administrative agency dispositions, or court rulings." In effect, this blocked legal services provided by platforms like Lotoc, such as ▲ lawyer fee comparisons ▲ lawyer fee estimates ▲ sentencing predictions.

At the time, while revising the regulations on lawyer advertising, the Bar Association allowed advertisements through portal sites like Naver and individual lawyers' YouTube channels and blogs, which intensified the conflict between the Bar Association and platform companies. In the legal community, there were complaints that the Bar Association revised these regulations to block the business operations of legal platform companies.

Ultimately, Ro & Company, the operator of Lotoc, along with 60 lawyers, filed a constitutional complaint to confirm the unconstitutionality of the Bar Association's advertising regulations. Lotoc argued that the Bar Association's advertising regulations violated constitutional prohibitions on excessive restrictions, limited member lawyers' freedom of occupational choice and expression, restricted legal consumers' right to access lawyer information, and were unfair because no sanctions were imposed on portals providing similar services.

Lotoc claimed that the Bar Association completely revised the regulations to prohibit any lawyer from operating or advertising on online platforms, effectively creating a "Lotoc ban law."

The Bar Association and Lotoc have been in conflict since March 2015, but investigative agencies have repeatedly sided with Lotoc. Starting with the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office's decision in April 2015 to dismiss the case filed by the Seoul Bar Association against Lotoc as "no charges," prosecutors and police have all judged that Lotoc's services did not violate the Attorney-at-Law Act up to this month. Rather, the Fair Trade Commission sent the Bar Association review reports in November and December last year indicating violations of the Fair Trade Act and the Act on Labeling and Advertising.

One lawyer predicted, "Depending on the Constitutional Court's decision, one side will suffer a major blow," adding, "This will be a case that affects the entire legal platform industry."