Disciplinary Action for Using "Best" and "Only" in Lawyer Ads Upheld by Court

"Too Broad... Criticisms of Overregulation" Also Raised

There have been a series of court rulings affirming the legitimacy of disciplinary actions taken by the Korean Bar Association (hereinafter referred to as the "KBA") regarding the use of the expressions "best" or "top" in lawyer advertisements.

The Administrative Division 2 of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Kong Hyunjin) ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Lawyer A on June 4 seeking to overturn the Ministry of Justice Disciplinary Committee's decision to dismiss his objection. The court deemed that phrases such as "the top experts in the field of industrial accidents," "the only specialist in industrial accident and insurance law nationwide," and "more than double the success rate compared to other law firms" were advertisements that exaggerated facts and compared the lawyer to others.

On June 10, the Administrative Division 4-1 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judge Park Yeonwook) upheld the first-instance ruling against Law Firm B and Lawyer C and dismissed their appeal in their lawsuit to reverse the disciplinary actions taken by the Ministry of Justice Disciplinary Committee. In this case, the problematic phrases included "No. 1 in brand preference for six consecutive years," "top satisfaction," and "a lawyer who resolved hundreds of criminal cases and secured acquittals." The court found these expressions to be similar to the term "best," judging that they exaggerated the lawyer's abilities or status.

Article 9, Paragraph 2 of the current regulations on lawyer advertising prohibits the use of words such as "best," "only," or other similar expressions regarding oneself or one’s work. Regarding the criteria for determining what constitutes a similar expression, Moon Dongju (Class of 37, Judicial Research and Training Institute), KBA's Ethics Director, said, "There are no pre-set standards," explaining that each case is judged individually and specifically according to whether the advertisement might mislead consumers or disrupt fair engagement practices.

There are also criticisms of this regulatory approach. Lawyer Jeong Hyungkeun (Class 24), of The Smart Law Firm, stated, "(The KBA’s rules) represent a typical regulation-centered approach," and pointed out that “the phrase 'other similar expressions,' which serves as the basis for enforcement, is too broad and indeterminate. There have been consistent criticisms that regulating based on this is excessive.” Lawyer Jeong also added, "The KBA’s rules are imposing even stricter regulations than state agencies, despite not being actual laws."

As complaints continue regarding the rule on 'similar expressions', Choi Jaewon (third bar exam), Ethics Director of the Seoul Bar Association, which handles the initiation of disciplinary applications, stated, "Currently, only words such as 'best' or 'only', which are explicitly mentioned in the rules, are subject to disciplinary action." However, once the words "best" or "only" themselves are set as the standard, any inclusion of these words immediately becomes subject to sanction. There have even been cases where the Seoul Bar Association requested statements from law firms that included the word "best" in press releases for media distribution or phrases such as "we will foster the best talent" in website introductions, arguing that these could potentially violate advertising regulations.

The restriction on superlative expressions is not limited to the legal industry. The Medical Advertisement Review Committee of the Korean Medical Association also prohibits phrases such as "best," "first," "only," "state-of-the-art," "top," "first in the region," or "No. 1 in the region" in its advance self-regulatory review standards for medical advertisements.

Han Mina, The Law Times Reporter

※This article is based on content supplied by Law Times.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.