Attorney Kwon Kyung-ae, who caused a loss by failing to appear in a civil trial related to school violence, will have to compensate the victim's family more than the amount awarded in the appellate ruling.
The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Seo Kyung-hwan) partially overturned the lower court and remanded the case to the Seoul Central District Court in the appeal of a damages suit filed by the late Park Ju-won's mother, Lee Gi-cheol, against Attorney Kwon and the law firm Haemir. The gist is that, in addition to compensating Lee 65 million won in damages as ordered by the appellate court, Kwon must also pay 90 million won that Kwon agreed to pay for being responsible for losing the appeal.
Park, when a first-year middle school student in 2012, was bullied, and in 2015, as a first-year high school student, died after jumping from the rooftop of her apartment building. In 2016, Lee filed a lawsuit seeking 500 million won in damages against the perpetrators who bullied Park.
Representing Lee, Attorney Kwon won a partial victory at the first trial. But Kwon failed to appear three times in a row for appellate hearings from September to November 2022 and lost. Under the Civil Procedure Act, if a party fails to appear at least three times, the lawsuit is deemed withdrawn.
Kwon also did not inform the bereaved family for five months that the appeal had been lost. The family missed the Supreme Court appeal deadline, finalizing the defeat. Lee then filed a suit seeking 200 million won, saying Kwon's insincere representation infringed the right to a trial and the right to appeal.
In June 2024, the first-instance court ordered Attorney Kwon and then-affiliated law firm Haemir to jointly pay 50 million won to the family. In October last year, the appellate court ordered Kwon and the law firm to pay 65 million won. It also ordered Haemir to pay Lee 2.2 million won, half of the 4.4 million won appellate retainer fee. Lee appealed the appellate ruling.
The Supreme Court finalized the lower court ruling ordering Kwon and the law firm to pay Lee 65 million won, and ordering the law firm separately to pay Lee 2.2 million won.
The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the portion of the lower court ruling concerning the additional claim for the agreed amount that Lee added on appeal. After losing the school violence-related case on appeal, Kwon submitted a memorandum to Lee stating, "I will pay 30 million won by the end of 2023, 30 million won by the end of 2024, and 30 million won by the end of 2025 for my responsibility related to the case (appeal withdrawal due to two failures to appear)."
Lee additionally claimed this 90 million won agreed amount from Kwon on appeal, but it was not recognized. During the proceedings, Kwon argued, "This memorandum was conditional on ensuring that errors in the conduct of the litigation would not spread through media coverage," and the appellate court judged that even if this claim was not explicitly written in the memorandum, it would likely be true considering Kwon's profession as a prominent attorney and social activities. Before filing the damages suit against Kwon, Lee spoke with a reporter by phone and first discussed the school violence-related case.
However, the performance memorandum does not specify a payment condition that it "not be covered by the media." The Supreme Court said, "The objective meaning of the wording in the performance memorandum is clear in content, and there is little room to interpret the entries otherwise."
It continued, "As a legal professional, Attorney Kwon appears to have understood well the meaning and content of drafting a document," adding, "It is hard to accept that the payment condition was agreed to be part of the performance memorandum yet was not written down."
A Supreme Court official explained, "The court reaffirmed the legal principle that when the parties reduce the contract terms to writing, absent clear counterevidence denying what is written, the court must recognize the manifestation of intent according to the wording."
Separately, Lee asked the court to reopen the damages suit against the school violence perpetrators, in which defeat became final because Kwon did not appear. The Seoul High Court accepted the request and on the 20th held a hearing to consider whether to resume the trial. The issue is whether the deemed withdrawal of the suit (loss) due to Kwon's failure to appear can be considered void.