1. Research Objective 

In consideration of expanding public demands for the right of access to justice, now is the time that we should start preparing technological and institutional foundations to ensure affordable and convenient access to justice. Thus, this research attempts to offer policy options for introducing and responding to Legal Tech from a practical and realistic point of view, while recommending ways to enhance the right of access to justice and the way forward for Legal Tech putting the future of legal services into perspective.

2. Research Agenda

The research is trisected into the current state of the domestic and global Legal Tech industry, suggested responses to Legal Tech for focus areas - ① general legal services, ② civil litigation, and ③ criminal justice – and related issues.

A. The Current State of the Domestic and Global Legal Tech Industry 

Most promising AI-powered legal tech services include ① legal s review and analysis services such as contracts, ② legal research services that allow finding precedents, ③ prediction services including litigation analytics. Services currently being made in use are ① AI-powered contract review services, ② services that find precedents and recommend similar cases, ③ sentence prediction services, and ④ legal s translation services. 

B. Suggested Responses to Legal Tech for General Legal Services 

For better General Legal Services, it is necessary to respond to legal tech with ① paradigm shift in what legal service is, and ② consideration of alienated class in the modern digital society. 

C. Suggested Responses to Legal Tech for Civil Litigation 

In order to overcome the limitations of legal tech in civil litigation, it is necessary to introduce an evidence-gathering method for civil parties such as delivery in U.S., and to enhance the credibility of e-discovery by means of accumulation of cases and technical support.

D. Suggested Responses to Legal Tech for Criminal Justice 

For Criminal Justice, it is necessary to research the possibility of expanding Video Court, and to devise a plan for managing the upcoming electronic criminal procedure effectively. With regard to crime investigation, it is necessary to find practical options to open information about the investigation to the involved parties and to make crime information public at the trial stage or thereafter.

E. Related Issues 

Now is the time for Korea to consider Alternative Business Structure when Utah and Arizona effectively invalidate restrictions on fee sharing and non-lawyers’ investment in law firms and deregulates the practice of law monopolized by authorized lawyers. In addition, it is required to enact a provision to allow private information already made public to rev legal tech. 

3. Policy Recommendations 

To introduce and respond effectively to legal tech, what is most important is to establish the policy direction from the perspective of citizens. Considerations should also be cast on ① reflecting social desires on the right of access to justice, ② fostering human resources to cope with legal tech, ③ improving the Public Information Sharing System as a foundation for legal tech, and ④ establishing a long-term roadmap for successful institutionalization of legal tech.

 ※ Keywords: Legal Tech, Right of Access to Justice, Legal Policy, Regulatory Sandbox, Electronic Litigation, Data Protection