Building a 0→1 AI-Native Caselaw Search Platform
B2C SaaS AI Start-up
Shipped Since 2024
New Situation
Contact Us
Terms of Service
As I strolled through the mall, making my way toward the food court, I spotted a “wet floor” sign in the distance. But just...
It was early morning, and I was cycling along the Riverside trail at a steady pace. As I approached a sharp bend, another ...
While browsing the shelves at my local grocery store, I reached up to grab a can. Out of nowhere, several items toppled ...
As I stepped into the crosswalk with the light in my favor, a car suddenly rounded the corner without yielding, coming ...
I was walking down the street when a drunk person grabbed me by the collar and started a fight. In the middle of it ...
I was heading west along Maple Street in the evening, driving carefully as usual. But then, I suddenly saw friend’s pickup ...
Lawlow
I was walking down the street when a drunk person grabbed me by the collar and started a fight. In the middle of it, I lost my temper and punched them in the face. I'm completely fine, but now they're saying they have a facial fracture and are asking me to cover their medical bills. What should I do?
My situation
Show less
You might also ask
Tap to refine and search
The 'Issue' and 'Conclusion' sections are AI-generated and may contain errors. Please refer to the original case content for accurate information as provided by the court.
The defendant got into a dispute with the victim while stealing the victim's belongings from a warehouse. The defendant grabbed the victim by the throat and struck their face and eyes multiple times, causing cervical injuries requiring approximately 14 days of treatment.
The defendant claimed to have only grabbed the victim's throat in self-defense. However, the court found, based on testimony and medical records, that the defendant did strike the victim's face, and ruled the act was mutual aggression rather than self-defense.
The court found the defendant guilty of assault and sentenced them to a fine of 1,000,000 KRW. Failure to pay the fine would result in detention at a labor facility for a specified period.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#1
Relevance
94%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Uijeongbu District Court 2015.12.17 2014Go-Jeong2438 Assault and Battery
During an argument over unpaid drinks, the victim struck the defendant's face first. The defendant grabbed the victim by the collar and punched their face 4–5 times, causing a head contusion. The defendant argued self-defense and claimed diminished responsibility due to intoxication.
The court found that the defendant's punch exceeded passive defense and constituted active retaliation. The degree of intoxication was not sufficient to negate criminal responsibility. The act was deemed mutual aggression rather than self-defense, referencing Supreme Court precedent (2000Do228).
The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original conviction for bodily injury. Both the self-defense claim and the diminished responsibility claim were rejected, and criminal liability was maintained.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#2
Relevance
91%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Daegu District Court 2014.10.31 2014No1521
Bodily Injury
The other person started the fight while drunk, grabbing the defendant first. The defendant then punched back, causing facial fractures. Are there rulings that decided whether this counts as self-defense or went too far?
Show less
Was it self-defense or too far?
A
Both sides got into a fight, but one person is now claiming medical costs for a broken face. Are there similar cases that show how courts decided who was at fault and how much they had to pay?
Who pays for the injuries?
B
Overview
From Concept to v1: Launching a Caselaw Research Platform
Lawlow is an AI legal research platform enabling non-lawyers to easily access caselaw relevant to their personal legal situations through plain-language search. As the sole founding product designer, I shaped the product from the ground up: defining the core AI search interaction model with engineers, leading 40+ features, and building the visual system that has supported consistent development.
Team
Product Designer (me!)
AI Engineer (Product Owner)
Back-end developer
Front-end developer
Marketer
Skills
Product Strategy
Visual & Interaction Design
Design System
Usability Test
Tools
Figma, Jira, Miro
Duration
2024.01-2026.07
A note on this case study
This page provides a visual, high-level view of my contributions across the Lawlow product.
For a deeper look at how I improved case-search accuracy and addressed key business challenges,
see Keeping users exploring after a dead-end search ↗ and Guiding better search inputs with examples ↗ !
What’s Lawlow?
An easy entry into a complex search for caselaw, relevant to you
Back in 2024, the existing caselaw search systems were all filter-based, where people select conditions they barely know, then get flooded with a vast amount of results. It was too hard for the majority of people who aren't lawyers to find the right case. So we set out to build an AI-native platform enabling non-lawyers to find and understand relevant caselaw through plain-language search.
Onboarding
Review writing examples & Describe situation
Develop search through conversation with AI
Search & view results
Refine search with follow-up suggested questions
Main Contributions
My three contributions
One. Turning a single search interaction into a complete product ecosystem
After launching our beta MVP built around a single core search interaction, we got positive feedback from users and were eager to accelerate toward the full product. I took the initiative to define the full experience across the product. Since search was our core differentiator, I built it around that core flow, and jumped right into designing 40+ screens and modals.
Two. Building one visual system that could scale with a fast-moving product
Discussing with the team, we were aligned on the vision to provide people with easy entry into a complex legal domain and highly accurate, trustworthy caselaw matches through AI. Based on that, I came up with the thread concept, which metaphors Lawlow as a continuous thread, starting from an easy, accessible method and ending with a smart system that successfully surfaces the most relevant results.
Starting from color, typography, and icons, I defined a set of basic components that ensures a simple, modern look and efficient management. My design handoff, 9 out of 10 times, includes a master interactive prototype for each feature that clarifies various interaction states for quicker alignment with engineers, alongside static screens and components.
Heading 1
40px
Heading 2
32px
Heading 3
24px
Heading 4
20px
Small
16px
Tiny
14px
Design System
Design Handoff example
Three. Reprioritizing mobile after usage grew 3.5× larger than web
I first designed and shipped the web version properly, then simply spun up a rough web-app version for mobile. A few months in, the engineering team flagged that server data showed mobile traffic was already 3.5x higher than web, then I optimized the full product experience specifically for mobile.
New Situation
Contact Us
Terms of Service
As I strolled through the mall, making my way toward the food court, I spotted a “wet floor” sign in the distance. But just...
It was early morning, and I was cycling along the Riverside trail at a steady pace. As I approached a sharp bend, another ...
While browsing the shelves at my local grocery store, I reached up to grab a can. Out of nowhere, several items toppled ...
As I stepped into the crosswalk with the light in my favor, a car suddenly rounded the corner without yielding, coming ...
I was walking down the street when a drunk person grabbed me by the collar and started a fight. In the middle of it ...
I was heading west along Maple Street in the evening, driving carefully as usual. But then, I suddenly saw friend’s pickup ...
Lawlow
I was walking down the street when a drunk person grabbed me by the collar and started a fight. In the middle of it, I lost my temper and punched them in the face. I'm completely fine, but now they're saying they have a facial fracture and are asking me to cover their medical bills. What should I do?
My situation
Show less
You might also ask
Tap to refine and search
The 'Issue' and 'Conclusion' sections are AI-generated and may contain errors. Please refer to the original case content for accurate information as provided by the court.
The defendant got into a dispute with the victim while stealing the victim's belongings from a warehouse. The defendant grabbed the victim by the throat and struck their face and eyes multiple times, causing cervical injuries requiring approximately 14 days of treatment.
The defendant claimed to have only grabbed the victim's throat in self-defense. However, the court found, based on testimony and medical records, that the defendant did strike the victim's face, and ruled the act was mutual aggression rather than self-defense.
The court found the defendant guilty of assault and sentenced them to a fine of 1,000,000 KRW. Failure to pay the fine would result in detention at a labor facility for a specified period.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#1
Relevance
94%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Uijeongbu District Court 2015.12.17 2014Go-Jeong2438 Assault and Battery
During an argument over unpaid drinks, the victim struck the defendant's face first. The defendant grabbed the victim by the collar and punched their face 4–5 times, causing a head contusion. The defendant argued self-defense and claimed diminished responsibility due to intoxication.
The court found that the defendant's punch exceeded passive defense and constituted active retaliation. The degree of intoxication was not sufficient to negate criminal responsibility. The act was deemed mutual aggression rather than self-defense, referencing Supreme Court precedent (2000Do228).
The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original conviction for bodily injury. Both the self-defense claim and the diminished responsibility claim were rejected, and criminal liability was maintained.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#2
Relevance
91%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Daegu District Court 2014.10.31 2014No1521
Bodily Injury
The defendant and the victim, both taxi drivers, got into an argument while waiting for passengers. The defendant pushed the victim first, starting a physical fight. The defendant claimed that the victim had tried to strangle him and that he only pushed the victim in self-defense.
The court found insufficient evidence that the victim attempted to strangle the defendant. It determined that the defendant’s actions occurred during a mutual fight and could not be viewed solely as defensive. The injuries were considered within the range that could ordinarily result from such an altercation.
The court rejected the defendant’s appeal and upheld the original conviction for assault. The claim of self-defense was not accepted, and the defendant remained criminally liable.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#3
Relevance
85%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Incheon District Court 2017.06.16 2016No4429
Assault
During a fight at a motel, the defendant admitted that his finger came into contact with the victim’s mouth. After the incident, the victim received treatment from an orthopedic clinic and a dental clinic and was diagnosed with an oral laceration and a complete dislocation of a lower tooth.
The trial court found that the medical records and other evidence supported the conclusion that the defendant’s actions caused the victim’s injuries. The defendant disputed that his conduct amounted to bodily injury, but the court found the victim’s diagnosis and treatment history sufficiently credible.
The court rejected the defendant’s appeal and upheld the original conviction for bodily injury. The court concluded that the defendant’s actions caused the victim’s injuries and maintained criminal liability.
Problem
Facts
Judgement
#4
Relevance
70%
Access the Original
Copy to Clipboard
Incheon District Court 2013.04.18 2012No3257
Bodily Injury
The other person started the fight while drunk, grabbing the defendant first. The defendant then punched back, causing facial fractures. Are there rulings that decided whether this counts as self-defense or went too far?
Show less
Was it self-defense or too far?
A
Both sides got into a fight, but one person is now claiming medical costs for a broken face. Are there similar cases that show how courts decided who was at fault and how much they had to pay?
Who pays for the injuries?
B
Lawlow
My situation
The results are AI-generated and may contain errors. Please refer to the original court decision for accurate information.
1
Uijeongbu District Court 2015.12.17 2014Go-Jeong2438
Assault and Battery
Relevance
94%
Problem
The defendant got into a dispute with
the victim while stealing the victim's belongings from a warehouse. The defendant grabbed the victim by the throat and struck their face and eyes multiple times, causing cervical injuries requiring approximately 14 days of treatment.
Facts
The defendant claimed to have only grabbed the victim's throat in self-defense. However, the court found, based on testimony and medical records, that the defendant did strike the victim's face, and ruled the act was mutual aggression rather than self-defense.
Judgement
The court found the defendant guilty of assault and sentenced them to a fine of 1,000,000 KRW. Failure to pay the fine would result in detention at a labor facility for a specified period.
Access the original
Copy
You might also ask
Tap to refine and search
The other person started the fight while drunk, grabbing the defendant first. The defendant then punched back, causing facial fractures. Are there rulings that decided whether this counts as self-defense or went too far?
Show less
Was it self-defense or too far?
A
2
Daegu District Court
2014.10.31 2014No1521
Bodily Injury
Relevance
91%
Access the original
Copy
Sticked ‘My situation’ control
Swipable card carousel
Reflections
Learnings
The uncertain and fluctuating start-up environment taught me how to be flexible by reassessing goals and prioritizing tasks constantly and how to cope with the changes by actively communicating with partners and learning new things as we go.
2024, the night we stayed up to launch our beta
2026, one of our weekly team meetings, me joining remotely during grad school