A court has ruled it was justified to suspend a lawyer for one month for paid advertising by displaying the phrase "Representative of law firm OOO" on a club's electronic signboard and having a club employee handle promotion after making a business card with the title Director of a law office.
According to legal sources on the 6th, the Administrative Division 8 of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Yang Soon-ju) ruled against attorney A on Nov. 26 last year in a lawsuit to overturn the rejection of an objection filed against the Ministry of Justice Attorney Disciplinary Committee, saying, "The discipline imposed by the Korean Bar Association is appropriate."
After passing the bar exam, A worked at a law firm, then opened a practice and is affiliated with B Law Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul. A was found to have paid expense to display on electronic signboards at clubs and other entertainment venues the phrase "Representative attorney A of law firm B" since 2021.
A also had C, a Deputy Minister at an entertainment establishment, promote the office after making a business card that read "Director of law office." However, C was not registered as an office employee.
Under the Korean Bar Association rules, when a lawyer or law firm hires an office employee, it must report it without delay to the local bar association with which it is affiliated.
The Korean Bar Association Attorney Disciplinary Committee decided in September 2023 to suspend A for one month, finding that A's conduct "damaged the dignity of a lawyer." A then filed an objection with the Ministry of Justice Attorney Disciplinary Committee, arguing "there is no ground for discipline," but it was not accepted, and A later filed suit.
The court said, "A appears to have been able to exert considerable influence over club personnel, yet did not appear to raise an objection to the advertising phrase being exposed to the general public through the club's electronic signboard," adding, "It is difficult to find fault with the disciplinary committee's decision that A incited or encouraged the posting of the club signboard advertisement and violated the duty to maintain dignity."
In fact, the club signboard displayed not only the phrase "Representative attorney A of law firm B," but also phrases such as "Today's special No. 1 sales, 6-month cumulative sales 1.2 billion won, No. 1 in Gangnam, A, thank you," "OO, thank you♡ I'll start today, B, attorney A who parties well," "Attorney A, thank you for the 10 million won tip for all staff♡," and "OO, I've already been on K several times, K L case replay OOO – King of Seocho, attorney A."
A acknowledged not reporting without delay the hiring of C, a Deputy Minister at an entertainment establishment, as an office employee. C posted illegal prostitution ads on personal social media (SNS), but A said it was part of private life and did not provide guidance or supervision. On this point as well, the court said, "It does not appear erroneous to find that A violated the duty to maintain dignity by failing to guide or supervise C."