Case No. 2025가단10169
D. Daegu · Jan 6, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- D. Daegu
- Record ID
- case-no-2025가단10169-2026-01-06
- Observed outcome
- Warning
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
In case 2025가단10169, Daegu District Court’s Yeongdeok Branch rejected arguments grounded in non-existent or inapplicable precedents. Local court reporting identified a self-represented litigant who used false case numbers while using ChatGPT. The report treats the fabricated citations as part of the failed litigation argument, rather than as reliable authority supporting the party’s position.
The linked record identifies pro se and trial and records Warning. This page does not infer judicial reasoning beyond the source.
Pro-se ChatGPT submissions draw warnings; South Korean courts are now scrutinizing AI filings.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Warning
v.daum.net
Secondary or other linked source. The recorded link is not classified as an official court source or docket mirror.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
ChatGPT is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Latest evidence review: Metadata Only (medium confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Use only approved research and drafting tools for legal work.