Common English Mistakes in Legal Briefs by Korean Speakers

This page focuses on errors typically made by native Korean speakers from South Korea when writing a Legal Brief in English.

Mistake Example #1

Omitting articles ('a', 'an', 'the')

In response toa recent case, we argue that thedefendant did not breachthe contract as claimed. Evidence shows that theagreement was not violated because the terms were not clearly defined by theplaintiff. We request thecourt to dismiss thesecharges due toa lack of substantial proof and uphold justice in thismatter.

Text corrected by:
Jennifer, Detroit, Michigan USA

"Sounds good overall! I just needed to add some articles before certain words."

In response to a recent case, we argue that the defendant did not breach the contract as claimed. Evidence shows that the agreement was not violated because the terms were not clearly defined by the plaintiff. We request the court to dismiss these charges due to a lack of substantial proof and uphold justice in this matter.

In response to recent case, we argue that defendant did not breach contract as claimed. Evidence shows that agreement was not violated because terms were not clearly defined by plaintiff. We request court to dismiss charges due to lack of substantial proof and uphold justice in matter.

Mistake Example #2

Incorrect word order in complex sentences

In the matter of the defendant's actions, it is crucial to consider, before the court, the evidence presentedbefore the court. The timeline, which the prosecution has provided,it does not accurately reflect the sequence of events, as the defense will demonstrate. Furthermore, the witness statements, although compelling, theylack corroboration from independent sources, which is necessary for establishing credibility.

Text corrected by:
Jennifer, Detroit, Michigan USA

"I changed the word order of the second sentence and took out some superfluous words."

In the matter of the defendant's actions, it is crucial to consider the evidence presented before the court. The timeline, which the prosecution has provided, does not accurately reflect the sequence of events, as the defense will demonstrate. Furthermore, the witness statements, although compelling, lack corroboration from independent sources, which is necessary for establishing credibility.

In the matter of the defendant's actions, it is crucial to consider, before the court, the evidence presented. The timeline, which the prosecution has provided, it does not accurately reflect the sequence of events, as the defense will demonstrate. Furthermore, the witness statements, although compelling, they lack corroboration from independent sources, which is necessary for establishing credibility.

Mistake Example #3

Confusion with prepositions ('in', 'on', 'at')

In the matter of Park v. Lee, it is argued that the defendant was not present inat the scene of the incident at the time it occurred. The evidence presented shows that the defendant was at home on the night in question, and therefore could not have been involved in the alleged activities. It is crucial to consider these facts into reaching a fair judgment oin this case.

Text corrected by:
Gregg, Los Angeles, CA

"This needed some corrections for improper prepositional phrasing."

In the matter of Park v. Lee, it is argued that the defendant was not present at the scene of the incident at the time it occurred. The evidence presented shows that the defendant was at home on the night in question, and therefore could not have been involved in the alleged activities. It is crucial to consider these facts to reach a fair judgment in this case.

In the matter of Park v. Lee, it is argued that the defendant was not present in the scene of the incident at the time it occurred. The evidence presented shows that the defendant was at home on the night in question, and therefore could not have been involved in the alleged activities. It is crucial to consider these facts in reaching a fair judgment on this case.