AI expected to streamline dockets, reduce backlogs in Korean courts

gettyimagesbank

As the legal sector expands its use of artificial intelligence (AI), many expect that AI-driven systems could help ease crowded dockets and allow judges to turn their attention to cases that demand greater human discernment.

However, while the technology is embraced as a way to ease the judiciary’s burden, experts caution that firm boundaries and clear guidelines will be essential to guard against ethical risks.

Legal experts say the Supreme Court’s administrative arm has quietly rolled out its own AI platform, a move intended to streamline legal research and trial management as the nation’s judiciary moves toward a digital future. The system, developed by the National Court Administration, is now undergoing an evaluation of a pilot program.

The system draws on a deep reservoir of court records, including every ruling issued since 2013, to provide judges with more efficient access to case law. Eschewing public AI services, the National Court Administration opted for a proprietary framework to ensure that trial-related work remains contained within the judiciary’s own secure network.

This approach is intended to ensure the security and independence of judicial data, while allowing the courts to gradually refine customized AI models tailored to the specific needs of judicial work.

The courts plan to enhance the accuracy of the first-phase system currently under operation while advancing a second-phase project — targeted for development as early as this year — to analyze and organize case records filed with the courts.

The next-stage system will review documents such as complaints, preparatory briefs and responses, summarizing key points and legal issues.

In later phases, the AI is expected to help judges check draft rulings for logical errors or awkward phrasing and assist with administrative tasks such as locating addresses for document delivery.

The Supreme Court building in Seocho District, Seoul, Thursday / Yonhap

Experts say AI could reshape courtroom proceedings and enable judges to concentrate on cases requiring deeper expertise. But they also emphasize the need for clear guardrails, warning against an overreliance on systems that can carry unseen risks.

“AI will be able to swiftly review case records, identify key issues and quickly locate relevant precedents and statutes, significantly improving work efficiency,” said Chung Tae-ho, a professor of law at Kyung Hee University.

However, Chung noted that the system’s effectiveness will ultimately hinge on the volume and quality of the data on which it is built.

“What matters is how systematically court rulings and other judicial records have been accumulated and organized within the judiciary,” he said, adding that the extent of such groundwork will be key to the system’s performance.

Lee Ho-sun, a law professor at Kookmin University, said the adoption of AI could ease judges’ workloads by handling routine cases that can be assessed in a largely mechanical manner, enabling more judges to focus on complex trials requiring deeper deliberation.

“If AI can deliver conclusions in summary cases, it would reduce the burden on judges and allow more of them to be assigned to substantive trials,” he said.

Meanwhile, Lee also cautioned against excessive reliance on the technology, warning that expanding its use too broadly could lead judges to depend on AI even in areas that require careful human judgment.

“Judges may at first review and verify the system’s output, but there is a real risk that over time they could grow overly dependent on AI-generated conclusions without adequate cross-checking,” he said, warning that such reliance could ultimately erode judicial judgment and create serious problems.

“The courts need to set clear guidelines on the scope of AI use,” he added.