On January 29, 2026, the Korean National Assembly passed an amendment to the Attorney-at-Law Act (the “Amendment”), formally introducing the concept of Attorney-Client Privilege (“ACP”). The Amendment was approved by the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee (“LJC”) on December 18, 2025, and is expected to take effect in early February 2027, following a one-year grace period after its promulgation.
The Amendment, through the addition of a new Article 26-2 to the Attorney-at-Law Act (“ALA”), codifies ACP and expands protection for confidential communications between clients and attorneys, as well as for attorney work product. Crucially, although the Amendment will enter into force after the one-year grace period, its protections will apply retroactively to attorney-client communications and work products produced prior to the official effective date.
The adoption of ACP was a key policy initiative of President Jae‑Myung Lee, prompted by growing concerns that Korea’s existing legal framework did not adequately protect attorney‑client communications, particularly during government investigations. Although the Criminal Procedure Act and the pre‑amendment ALA provided limited protection for confidential information in an attorney’s possession and for attorney‑client communications, they lacked explicit provisions regarding ACP. Consequently, neither the person subject to a search‑and‑seizure warrant nor his or her attorney could invoke ACP as a formal legal right during the execution of the warrant, making it difficult to safeguard confidential communications.
As noted at the LJC’s review session on December 12, 2025, Korean investigative authorities have historically been permitted to search law offices to seize emails, documents, and other attorney‑client communications, and even to summon attorneys as witnesses. This practice has been criticized for hollowing out the constitutional right “to receive the assistance of counsel” under the Korean Constitution.
The Amendment seeks to address these concerns and to align Korea’s ACP regime more closely with those of common-law jurisdictions. The new statutory language adds four sections to the ALA (the first three being substantive), as follows:
-
Section 1 of the newly added Article 26-2 of the ALA grants attorneys and their clients, including prospective clients, the right “not to disclose confidential communications exchanged for the purpose of providing or receiving assistance in legal cases or legal affairs.”
-
Section 2 expressly provides that attorneys and their clients “may refuse to disclose documents or materials prepared in connection with litigation, investigations or regulatory examinations in matters for which they have been retained.”
-
Section 3 provides four exceptions to the preceding sections. Specifically, ACP may not apply when: (a) the client has waived the privilege; (b) disclosure is necessary to protect substantial public interests (e.g., when the attorney and client are accomplices to a crime); (c) disclosure is necessary for the attorney to address a dispute with the client; and (d) as determined under other laws containing special provisions.
The codification of ACP is expected to significantly transform Korea’s legal landscape. Additional guidelines and related litigation are also likely to follow (including on the broad “substantial public interest” exception), further defining the scope and applicability of these protections. Companies and law firms operating in Korea should therefore establish clear standards for identifying and protecting confidential materials and communications created during the provision of legal services.
Related Topics
