94% of Lawyers Support Greater Disclosure of Court Rulings... Majority Also Favor Naming Litigation Representatives

Korean Bar Association and Seoul Bar Survey: 94.2% of Lawyers
"Expansion of Court Ruling Disclosure Needed"
Majority Cite Right to Know, Principle of Public Trials, and Litigation Reference
Positive Views on Potential for AI and Big Data Ut

Nine out of ten lawyers are in favor of expanding the scope of public access to court rulings.

This is the result of a survey commissioned by the Korean Bar Association (President Kim Jungwook) to the Seoul Bar Association, conducted over seven days from September 8 to 14, targeting 2,096 practicing members of the Seoul Bar. The online survey consisted of 14 questions, both multiple-choice and open-ended.

Among all respondents, 94.2% supported expanding the scope of public access to court rulings beyond the current level. The main reasons cited were the constitutional principle of open trials and the public's right to know (34.9%), reference for litigation cases (30%), and support for fair trials (24.1%). Some respondents (10.6%) also mentioned that the use of court rulings in artificial intelligence (AI) and big data could contribute to the development of legal technology.

Regarding the disclosure of the names and affiliations of lawyers involved in litigation within court rulings, support (61.9%) was higher than opposition (37.0%). Those in favor cited enhanced accountability in case handling by lawyers (34.9%) and the need to provide information from the perspective of the public's right to know (35.8%). However, there was a stronger preference for a system where disclosure is the default but allows for non-disclosure at the lawyer's request, rather than full disclosure. Those opposed expressed concerns about the potential stigmatization of lawyers involved in certain cases (39.2%) and the risk of misuse, such as the mass collection and commercial sale of lawyer information (32.1%).

On the question of differentiating the method and scope of court ruling disclosure between lawyers and non-lawyers, a majority of 55.9% were in favor. The most common reason was to prevent commercial exploitation stemming from non-lawyers collecting court rulings for profit (36.5%). Regarding the method of disclosure, the most preferred option was to make court rulings available only to lawyers, with the general public excluded (37.6%). This was followed by options such as exempting only lawyers from fees or removing limits on the number of times lawyers can access rulings.

Regarding the appropriateness of the current system that requires in-person visits to view court rulings, 94.8% of respondents said improvements are needed. As for the method, the most common response was to introduce a separate authentication system for lawyers, granting them online access to court rulings (40.4%), followed by expanding the locations where in-person viewing is possible to include all levels of courts (27.6%).