1. The Client’s Crisis

The client (A) was facing juvenile court proceedings for driving without a license and had already been ordered to undergo protective dispositions under items 1, 2, 3, and 4. In juvenile cases, multiple protective dispositions are often imposed together, and among them, the item 4 disposition (short-term probation supervision) was a situation that could have a special impact on the juvenile’s future under particular circumstances. The guardian contacted several places to ask whether there was any way to cancel even just the item 4 disposition, but after being told only that it would be difficult because the disposition was not excessive, they eventually came to the law firm Jeonjae.

2. Key Issues

The difficulties in this case were largely threefold. First, an appeal of a protective disposition is, to put it by analogy, equivalent to the second trial of a case (the appellate trial), and in juvenile proceedings it is extremely rare for a first-instance decision to be changed through an appeal. Second, the dispositions ordinarily subject to appeal are serious ones at item 8 or higher, whereas this case involved item 1 through item 4 dispositions, which, based on objective sentencing standards, were not easy to view as excessive. Third, in light of the seriousness of the offense of driving without a license, there was a view that the item 1 through item 4 dispositions were already a fairly lenient result, so the practical benefit of an appeal itself was in question.

3. Jeonjae’s Strategy

Attorney O Ji-eun took on the case after identifying, through a consultation, the specific grounds on which the item 4 disposition should be overturned. Because we had to persuade the court regarding a disposition that was not ordinarily subject to appeal, we formed a dedicated team to prepare our response.

Based on extensive experience with family law cases, we prepared a helper’s opinion letter and argued the following points. We demonstrated that A had lived diligently until then and did not show delinquent tendencies to the extent that teachers and people around him trusted him; that this was the first time he had engaged in such misconduct; that he was currently devoting himself earnestly to preparing for his future; that if the record of an item 4 disposition remained, it could affect his future in light of the special circumstances of a juvenile; and, taken together, that the item 4 disposition may have been somewhat too severe for A and could run counter to the purpose of juvenile proceedings.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The appellate court ruled, "The portion of the first-instance decision ordering the juvenile under protection to receive short-term probation supervision is revoked." Considering all the circumstances, the court found the item 4 short-term probation supervision disposition in the first-instance decision to be improper. A was able to avoid leaving behind a disposition record that could have affected his future.

Attorney in Charge: Attorney O Ji-eun

To protect confidentiality, some parts of this case have been anonymized to the extent that they do not compromise the essence of the matter.