AI Lowers Court Barriers: 90% of Cases Go Unrepresented as ChatGPT Becomes the Lawyer

Nine out of 10 civil lawsuits in South Korea now proceed with at least one party without legal representation, in so-called "solo litigation." Analysts say the proliferation of the electronic filing system, combined with growing use of artificial intelligence to draft complaints and briefs, has significantly lowered the barrier to filing lawsuits for ordinary citizens.

According to the Supreme Court of Korea, 786,085 first-instance civil cases on the merits were processed in 2024. Of those, 705,567 cases — or 89.7% — involved at least one party without an attorney. Cases where neither side retained a lawyer accounted for 67.3%. The ratio of both parties going unrepresented reached nearly 81% in everyday disputes such as loan repayment and lease deposit claims.

Unlike criminal cases, retaining an attorney is not mandatory in civil litigation in South Korea. With electronic filings now accounting for 99% of all civil case submissions, the litigation process has become far more accessible. More recently, ordinary citizens have begun using generative AI tools such as ChatGPT to draft complaints, making it even easier to file suits.

Legal professionals warn, however, that AI-drafted documents may appear polished on the surface but carry risks of citing fabricated precedents or inaccurately summarizing facts. "AI's potential can be compared to that of a lawyer with more than five years of experience, but the quality of the documents varies greatly depending on the user's own competence," said Noh Jong-eon, managing partner at law firm Jonjae. "As more individuals file suits using AI, the review burden on judges could also grow."

"One Person Filed 3,800 Cases"… E-Filing and AI Lower the Entry Barrier

"A friend borrowed 100 million won and won't return my calls. What should I do?"

When this question was typed into OpenAI's ChatGPT, an answer appeared in just two seconds. ChatGPT responded that "this has gone beyond a personal matter to a stage where legal action should be considered," advising the user to send a formal notice of demand and then either apply for a payment order or file a civil lawsuit. It even produced drafts of the notice and the complaint in an instant — delivering the kind of advice a lawyer might give.

With generative AI tools — OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Anthropic's Claude — advancing rapidly, AI has effectively entered an era of serving as a "legal secretary." Whereas obtaining tailored legal advice once required paying a consultation fee and visiting a lawyer's office, now anyone with a smartphone can easily access basic legal information.

Combined with the widespread adoption of the electronic filing system, the threshold for initiating lawsuits has dropped even further, analysts say. According to the Supreme Court, electronic filings accounted for 99.8% of all civil cases processed in 2024. More than two-thirds of first-instance civil cases on the merits were handled with both parties — or at least one — going without a lawyer. In the past, drafting a complaint, gathering supporting documents, and physically visiting a court posed a significant burden for ordinary citizens. Now, AI drafts complaints and briefs while the e-filing system allows online submission, dramatically reducing procedural barriers.

Even individuals with limited legal knowledge can now prepare documents with AI assistance and file cases directly through the electronic system, creating an environment where lawsuits can be initiated much more easily and quickly. The legal community believes that if the convenience of e-filing and the popularization of generative AI converge, the number of lawsuits could climb even more steeply.

In a notable example, a person identified only as "Mr. A," known in legal circles for prolific litigation, reportedly filed 3,830 of the 7,283 civil cases reviewed by the Supreme Court in the first half of 2024 — all on his own. A former judge turned lawyer said, "Mr. A would appeal every time a case was dismissed and even file for retrials after Supreme Court rulings. If someone like that starts using AI, lawsuits will surge further and the waste of the court's administrative resources will only worsen."

As AI-assisted litigation grows, the legal community is increasingly concerned that so-called "hallucinations" could disrupt trials. AI-generated responses may appear convincing but can fail to accurately reflect actual statutes or cite precedents that do not exist. In such cases, judges must re-verify every submitted document, potentially delaying proceedings. A presiding judge said, "When I look at briefs prepared with AI assistance, it is not uncommon to find citations to precedents that simply do not exist."

To reduce such confusion, the courts have taken action. Since May 20, the Court Administration Office has offered a "false case number verification" service on the Judicial Information Disclosure Portal. The measure aims to prevent user confusion caused by fictitious case numbers generated by AI and to bolster the reliability of judicial information.

Legal experts say society needs to reach a consensus on how far AI should be used in trials and legal services. Overseas, conflicts over AI-based legal services are already spreading. Recently, the U.S. subsidiary of Nippon Life Insurance (Nissei) filed a $10.3 million (approximately 15.6 billion won) damages suit against OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPT provided legal advice without attorney qualifications, causing the company to become embroiled in unnecessary litigation.

Lawyers Surge 70% in a Decade… 'Engineered Lawsuits' Spread Amid Competition

With law schools producing roughly 1,700 new lawyers each year, the total number of attorneys has jumped more than 70% over the past decade. The intensifying competition for cases driven by this surge is reshaping the legal market itself. New business models such as "network law firms" operating nationwide offices and novel legal services like engineered lawsuits challenging price-cap calculations on apartment sales have given ordinary citizens more exposure to litigation, analysts say.

According to the Korean Bar Association, the number of registered lawyers stood at 38,123 as of last month, up 76% from 21,599 in 2016. With 1,700 new law school graduates entering the market each year, concerns about oversupply are mounting.

In this era of fierce competition, engineered lawsuits — strategically organized litigation — are on the rise. In a notable case last year, residents of an apartment complex in Dasan New Town, Namyangju, Gyeonggi Province, teamed up with a mid-sized law firm to file a claim for unjust enrichment against builder GS Engineering & Construction and others at the Seoul Central District Court. The suit followed a February 2020 audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection that flagged problems with additional cost calculations in the complex's price-capped sale. Residents demanded the return of a total of 52.9 billion won in additional costs. A nearby apartment complex where residents recovered several million won per household through a similar lawsuit also reportedly influenced the decision to sue. An industry source said, "With the legal market saturated, small and mid-sized law firms are generating significant revenue through these engineered lawsuits."

The legal community also views the rush by mid-sized law firms to join class-action suits after a large-scale personal data breach at Coupang (CPNG) late last year as another sign of the market's transformation. Law firm Daeryun recruited participants for a related class action last year, and approximately 1,000 people have reportedly joined the suit so far. Another mid-sized firm, LKB Pyeongsan, is also pursuing a class action over the same Coupang data breach. While boutique law firms once dominated engineered lawsuits, market saturation has now pushed even so-called "top 10 law firms" into this space, analysts say.