Seoul Administrative Court rules ‘sentence prediction’ and ‘discounted rates’ claims violated fair practices
A court has ruled that administrative fines imposed on a law firm and its representative lawyer for using phrases such as “sentence prediction in 15 seconds” and “unprecedented discounted rates” in advertisements were justified.
Seoul Administrative Court’s Administrative Division 3, Presiding Judge Ho Seong-ho, dismissed a lawsuit filed by A Law Firm and its representative lawyer B against the Ministry of Justice Lawyer Discipline Committee on June 12, rejecting the plaintiffs’ request to cancel the fines.
The Korean Bar Association’s Lawyer Discipline Committee had fined the plaintiffs 30 million Korean won each in April 2024 for inappropriate advertising. A Law Firm was found to have used phrases like “100% refund if dismissed” and “unprecedented discounted rates” in its fee-related advertisements. After the plaintiffs appealed, the Ministry of Justice Lawyer Discipline Committee rejected their objection but reduced B’s fine to 10 million Korean won. The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in June 2025, arguing the decision was unjust.
The court upheld the Ministry’s decision, stating the advertisements were problematic. It ruled that phrases such as “11,347 successful cases” and “cumulative consultations: 267,854 cases (overwhelming big data)” were inappropriate because they lacked clarity on how the figures were calculated. The court noted, “Presenting such numbers may imply guaranteed results or high success rates, leading consumers to have undue expectations about service outcomes. The cumulative consultation figures, without clear criteria, also risk creating unjustified expectations.”
The court also criticized phrases like “unprecedented discounted rates” as problematic. It stated, “Such advertisements imply free or unfairly low fees, potentially undermining fair fee practices.” It added, “Displaying ‘100% refund if dismissed’ similarly suggests unfairly low fees, violating fair practices.” The court emphasized, “The public interest in penalizing unfair advertising under the Attorney Act and advertising regulations outweighs the plaintiffs’ disadvantages. The fines are not disproportionately harsh.”
https://www.chosun.com/english/national-en/2026/06/20/DBQCPXXOTVHN3JDB34IKDSKZCU/
