SEOUL (Korea Herald/ANN): South Korea’s judiciary is stepping up its response to the use of artificial intelligence in court proceedings after AI-generated hallucinations have led lawyers to cite non-existent “ghost precedents” in legal submissions, according to the National Court Administration (NCA).
Administrative bodies of courts are considering legal reforms that would modify court procedures, including fines and other measures, to eliminate false legal evidence created by AI.
Judges are increasingly concerned about plaintiffs and their lawyers citing non-existent precedents and statutes during court proceedings.
A judge at a Seoul court said, “In the judgment, he pointed out in footnotes the non-existent cases cited by the lawyers.” “Well, there are a lot of them, so I’ll point them out in parentheses in the text.
“It now takes more time because we have to review each case cited.”
cite false examples
In one case reported by the Korean-language daily JoongAng Ilbo, a lawyer who handled the case at the Daegu High Court cited a non-existent Supreme Court precedent in filing the lawsuit. When the court asked for an explanation, the lawyer cited another case that also did not exist.
In another case, a lawyer from Gwangju City cited Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Code, but stated legal content unrelated to the article.
In the Ulsan District Court, a lawyer cited unrelated Supreme Court precedent and later admitted that he “did not properly review the content after using Google Gemini to research the precedent.”
Courts are increasingly calling out such false citations. In a written judgment in an investment-related lawsuit by the Seoul Southern District Court, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, stating that “the defendant’s claim is based on a precedent that does not exist.”
Another judge said, “The vetting process for the judge to review the case took an excessive amount of time, leaving open the possibility that the lawyer simply made a typo.”
Court considers fine, in-house AI system
In response, judicial authorities are calling for legal reforms that would allow courts to impose fines on lawyers who submit false statutes or precedents.
It also calls for amending court procedural rules to require parties to disclose whether AI was used to prepare documents submitted.
Courts currently have the potential to limit arguments, require disciplinary action against lawyers, and impose legal costs if AI misuse delays proceedings.
In February, judicial authorities added a function to the judicial information portal that allows people to check the existence of court numbers. Additionally, a guidebook for detecting false precedents using AI was distributed to judges. This guidebook includes AI prompts that allow judges to check the credibility of the cases cited.
Meanwhile, NCA announced that it has set aside 16.1 billion won (S$13.6 million) to implement its own in-house AI system.
In February, the NCA launched a pilot version of an AI-powered trial support system that includes Supreme Court precedents, judgments, practical manuals, and legal commentary.
The law enforcement agency has completed the first phase of a four-phase project and is moving forward with the introduction of generative AI into its systems. — Korea Herald/Asia News Network
