Part 2 | How Should Lawyers Use AI?
Lawyers should use AI as a tool for self-checking and sharpening thinking, recognizing its limitations in providing definitive legal judgment.Summary
This article, part two of a series, explores how lawyers can effectively integrate AI into their practice. The author, Attorney Hong Seung-kwon, notes a divide among lawyers regarding AI adoption, with some embracing it and others avoiding it. He shares a colleague’s concern about losing a sense of personal understanding when relying too heavily on AI-generated answers.
He highlights the distinct roles of two AI tools he uses: Super Lawyer, a legal AI with a structured database, and ChatGPT, a general-purpose language model. Super Lawyer excels at organizing legal issues, checking precedents, and identifying relevant statutes, offering traceability of its sources. ChatGPT, while broad in scope and quick to respond, is prone to inaccuracies and requires careful verification.
The author emphasizes that AI, despite its usefulness, cannot replace legal judgment. True legal judgment requires considering context, emotion, and the human impact of a case – elements beyond the scope of AI analysis. He concludes that AI is a valuable tool but ultimately serves to support, not supplant, the lawyer’s critical thinking and decision-making process, and will discuss the meaning of 'judgment' in the next article.
(Source：Korea It Times)
