Obtaining Supreme Court Decision on Attorney-Client Privilege

In a case defended by Lee & Ko, the prosecution seized materials reflecting communications between the client, an asset management company, and its attorneys. In response, we filed an interlocutory appeal and obtained a decision from the Seoul Southern District Court recognizing attorney-client privilege.

Although the prosecution filed a re-appeal against the above decision, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution’s seizure had infringed the appellants’ constitutional right to the assistance of counsel. The Court further ruled that attorney-client privilege (“ACP”) constitutes an essential element of the constitutional right to the assistance of counsel, and that the seizure of legal advice documents and similar materials concerning a criminal case that were created between a suspect or defendant and their counsel may infringe the constitutional right to the assistance of counsel, and therefore, in principle, should not be permitted.

Until the amendment to the Attorney-at-Law Act, which passed the plenary session on January 29, 2026, Korea lacked an explicit legislative basis for attorney-client privilege, and a structural limitation persisted whereby documents and electronic information created in the course of providing legal advice were subject to broad investigation by investigative authorities. From the earliest stages of the search and seizure, Lee & Ko consistently argued that the seizure of materials reflecting communications between attorney and client was an unlawful measure contrary to the Constitution and the law, thereby bringing about a shift in judicial reasoning.

Through this Supreme Court decision and the 2026 amendment to the Attorney-at-Law Act, attorney-client privilege has become firmly established within our legal system as a doctrine grounded in a clear constitutional and legislative basis.

Lee & Ko’s Criminal Litigation Practice Group will continue to devote its best efforts to protecting clients’ defense rights, drawing on expertise and strategic responsiveness suited to the evolving legal environment.