Jump to content
Luckycharm

Junior associate $20 an hour???

Recommended Posts

Saw an ad on Indeed job 

Junior associate GTA area

0-5 years $20 an hour- billable hours?

Will offer more if....

You get $6 per hour more than $14 minimum wage. ( worst if only billable hours are paid) after investing 4 years (including article) to get call.

your thoughts?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$20 per hour is extremely low but not criminal

$20 per billable hour is criminally low.  

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been reading and reading, then reading some more on the job market for lawyers over the past year and have come to some conclusions (they may or may not be wrong).

1.) The field of law is NOT like our professional counterparts in medicine or dentistry, where a job is near guaranteed due to high demand. Ex. The armed forces in Canada currently offer 6 figure bonuses to direct entries for medical/dental staff, but recently got rid of the direct entry training program education subsidy for law school (to my knowledge).

2.) Law like most other jobs in the world will see the best and brightest succeed, and the lazy and uninspired will have difficulty finding meaningful employment.

3.) A law degree is a tool, what you do with that tool is up to you.

4.) A law degree is NOT a ticket to a high paying job, it is a means of getting there.

5.) A law degree is a lucrative opportunity. An opportunity is not a guarantee.

There is are people that consider their Canadian JD as if it's a degree from HYS that pretty much guarantees them a $180K USD job on wall street if desired. I guess, rightfully so given most admitted students in Canada are graduating top 15 - 20% of their class in high school, then top 15 - 20% of their class in University. 

However as the cream of the crop enter law school, the real test begins you are no longer only measured by your academic prowess, but by your ability to lead, network, socialize, build connections, create community, understand abstract subjects, and essentially build a business. Even in the corporate world, I'm sure the highest marks may get you an interview or even the job, but how successful you are or long you last will be determined by the previously mentioned attributes.

Someone will take the $20/hr job, they most likely are not the best and brightest lawyer. Or maybe they are who knows :rock:.
 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen lower. The market is garbage. An employer can basically offer anything and finding someone who will take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's the ad I'm looking at, it's $20 an hour (doesn't say per billable house) plus bonuses, and notes that there would be compensation for bringing in new files, which is a very different proposition.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind, that job also requires that you have the "Ability to perform miracles (at least occasionally)".  I'm not sure I want to hire someone who is able to perform miracles (even occasionally) but is willing to do so for only $20.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure an applicant listing occasional miracle-work on their resume leads much to any credibility (or sound mental health for that matter).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we have an oversupply of lawyers not just coming out of Canadian universities but also students who take the LLB route in the UK and other countries and get licensed to practice in Canada.  Hence, the oversupply causes a downward pressure on wages.  The situation is worst in the  US and much worst in the UK/Europe .  In fact, an article stated that  only 25% of students who graduate with an LLB degree in the UK become solicitors  ( at least they  are not required to have an undergraduate degree and write the LSAT ). 

Now ,  a JD degree might provide opportunities in other fields such a policing.  For example, an RCMP officer after five years with the force has an income of almost $100k.  But, overall ,  the situation with the legal profession in Canada is not what used to be 20 years ago or even 10 years  ago, and the likelihood is  that things are going to get worst  based on what is happening in other countries.

Good luck OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do yourself a favor OP and work in doc review (if you live in Toronto). You will at least make better money and be able to service any student loans debts you have (if any).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

P.S. In addition to the above, and in direct reply to OZ (above) who I continue to believe has no practical experience on the Canadian legal market or on any other legal market, let me add the following.

There may be downward pressure on legal wages in Canada. I would need to think about it carefully. But the conditions OZ cites with such assumed authority have existed for a long time, are not new, and I'm not seeing statistical data over time. What we'd really be interested in are how legal salaries are growing or not growing in relation to other salaries. That might address the point he's raised with actual numbers, and I really don't know and I also don't care, in this context. Because he's just wrong. Whether or not there's downward pressure on legal salaries, this job posting is not an example of this. And thinking that it is just further exposes the ignorance and self-absorption of law students that you can't see the obvious.

This is a job where the lawyer in question would be litigating provincial offences, traffic tickets, small claims, petty ass criminal files, etc. for a small, generalist law office serving clients without a lot of money. It isn't the ability of the employer to pay more money that's limiting the remuneration of this position. It isn't that he can get away with paying less because there's an over-supply of candidates. It's the ability of the clients to pay that's limiting the remuneration. You do all realize, don't you, that individual people who need to hire a lawyer for their day-to-day shit aren't paying hundreds an hour, right? You do realize that real economics enter your lives too?

So once these clients pay whatever they can actually afford to pay, and the employer covers overhead and then takes whatever minimal slice of the remaining income that justifies employing another lawyer and supervising them (which is, I guarantee, a lot less than the 1/3 margin a "biglaw" employer would normally look for), what do you think is left over for the lawyer doing this job? Do you think an employer is getting rich off this arrangement and exploiting the poor, hard-working NCA student who went to Bond and then did the LPP at Ryerson (which is probably the profile of most applicants) who ended up here? Do you realize how little money is actually ending up in the employer's pocket at the end of the day?

It's the clients that are limiting the amount paid, here. If you don't want to work for individual people who have very little money, don't take a job like this. Work for large corporations if you can compete for that work. But see above, it's competitive. Don't turn your nose down at work like this because you just believe in your bones that everyone who needs a lawyer should be able to pay hundreds an hour or they should get the fuck out. How in the world do you imagine legal services work for real people?

The fact that anyone could post in a topic like this, and not realize that the ability of people to pay is a live factor, just proves to me, again, how fucking clueless many students are.

Edited by Diplock
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, LawMaidsTale said:

Do yourself a favor OP and work in doc review (if you live in Toronto). You will at least make better money and be able to service any student loans debts you have (if any).

No. At least, not without seriously thinking about the consequences. Don't rely on me, my knowledge/experience re document review is not current, but I'll still give a warning.

I too looked up the position mentioned by OP out of curiosity, and whatever the issues with the pay, it sounds like one will get substantive experience including getting into court. The sort of experience that would make one more marketable as an employee and improve one's skills as a lawyer. The sort of experience that looks good on a resume.

A document review position, even if paying significantly more, does not look good on a resume, does not generally make one marketable as an employee except for more document review, improves only a very specific subset of skills, and doesn't get you into court (unless you're suing Deloitte in that class action...).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

While I defer in totality to Diplock on this issue (and, in particular, reiterate his point that client ability to pay is what dictates lawyer fees). I'd also make the following observation. If anyone thinks this is a lousy opportunity, think about the counter-factuaL. 

The (presumably) new call applying for this job could hang up her own shingle. She makes what she brings in, when (if) she gets paid - less all her expenses - and has only herself to rely on.

Whereas this appears to be an opportunity which at least ensures some minimum remuneration sufficient to ensure that her continued ability to eat and live indoors doesn't (directly) depend the accounts payable minions at legal aid or the willingness of her clients to pay their bills, much less her immediate ability to attract clients, an opportunity to get a piece of whatever she does bring in, plus it provides a source of work, and maybe an environment where you ask you boss "hey, is this a good idea" during those early years when you don't know shit.  

Which seems like a more attractive alternative?  

You gotta start somewhere, if you're an ambitious, entrepreneurial candidate who just hasn't found a spot (for whatever reason), it's not clear that this is a terrible opportunity. 

Edited by maximumbob
stupidity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Diplock said:

I believe I've found the listing also, and I'm going to follow Bob's discretion and not link to it because based on this thread so far it would seem to be indirectly bad-mouthing the employer, who doesn't deserve it. But this is what I found:

" From $20/hr during probation period (negotiable) with bonuses, subject to experience and performance, ability to bring new files a plus and will be compensated but NOT a requirement."

So, here's the bottom line, folks. And if you find this news shocking, it's better to get used to it now than later.

This is a lower-end job. It's near the bottom of the spectrum for full-time employment as a lawyer. It's an entry-level job doing mainly the least well-remunerated work available to lawyers (I base that on the remainder of the ad) and at a small practice. The pay being offered is not at all impressive, but also not ridiculous and/or exploitative. I quoted the line above because I think the employer is actually being quite reasonable (remember that - if you identify them) and reading between the lines I think you can assume they know their base pay is low but they are willing to consider more for the right candidate, to award bonuses for strong performance, to reward bringing in files, etc.

This is a perfectly reasonable job posting.

Anyone who is shocked by this needs to get the fuck over themselves. Why? Because this is still a lower end job posting. Implicitly, this is the sort of job that you take if you are (a) not a competitive applicant for any job on the market that pays better, for doing higher-end work, and (b) in addition to not being able to get a better job elsewhere, you are also not able to successfully employ yourself doing even lower end work. Honestly folks, what the hell do you all expect? If you aren't good enough to interest any of the employers out there who are paying well, and you're not even organized enough to serve your own clients ... how well do you think it pays on the legal market to do this lower-end work while employed by someone else who is fronting the bills for the operation and (obviously) taking a cut of your production value?

Here's why you need to get the fuck over yourself. If you work hard, if you present well, if you know your stuff and you're even a moderately ambitious go-getter who is able to secure some work for yourself, this won't be you. Or at least it shouldn't be. There is plenty of good work on the market out there. This just isn't an example of it. This is an example of what you get paid when you fight high-end traffic tickets and lower end small claims in another lawyer's practice. But if you aren't any of these things, and if you just limp your way through law school and make it out the other end with a degree and very little idea of what the hell it's used for ... yeah, you could end up here, if you are lucky. Did you really imagine otherwise?

A law degree isn't a license to print money. If you didn't know that already, you do now. Wake the fuck up because you've been warned. You are part of the same competitive economy as everyone else. You aren't special, and your accomplishments to this point in your life do not exempt you from the same need for hard work and the same uncertainty that all the rest of the world deals with. There are many good employment opportunities in law. There's also some bad ones. And there's a minority who can't find work at all, too. That tends to come up in other threads, but might as well combine the topics. Law does not promise universal employment. Never has, and never will.

Not everyone who goes to law school is so fucking special that they deserve, or can reasonable be worth, a lot of money to an employer. If you're bothered by that, then your goal is to not be among the least effective students in your class and it won't be your problem. If, however, your bar for success is just not failing, then yeah. Consider this in your future and possibly modify the criteria which you apply to yourself.

I agree with most of what you said. 

But I do want to challenge your view that there are "many good employment opportunities in law" and that a "minority who can't find work at all". There is an unprecedented over-saturation of the legal market at the moment, in large part because the number of foreign-trained law students has gone up considerably and LSUC has provided them with a non-articling route to be called.

I have seen first hand people I know trying and failing to get a position, even though they are very competent and articled at reputable firms. For every associate position, there are 10 people being interviewed. 

So while some law students/new calls may have a sense of entitlement, we should still recognize that the legal market is a shitshow right now, and one where firms can get away with paying associates very little.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, thegoodlaw said:

I agree with most of what you said. 

But I do want to challenge your view that there are "many good employment opportunities in law" and that a "minority who can't find work at all". There is an unprecedented over-saturation of the legal market at the moment, in large part because the number of foreign-trained law students has gone up considerably and LSUC has provided them with a non-articling route to be called.

I have seen first hand people I know trying and failing to get a position, even though they are very competent and articled at reputable firms. For every associate position, there are 10 people being interviewed. 

So while some law students/new calls may have a sense of entitlement, we should still recognize that the legal market is a shitshow right now, and one where firms can get away with paying associates very little.

 

There may be something to this. I don't want to dismiss the point entirely, when it's coming from people who know better than I. The fact is, I've been self-employed almost my entire time in practice, so I don't have a lot of experience in testing the associate waters. I also work in an area of law where self-employment isn't only an option, but often a sign of success rather than failure. I don't know what it would be like in an area of practice where working as an associate is almost required in order to be employed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Or you could answer the job add that many, many do reply to:

"initial hiring fee of $50,000,.  You will be required to pledge your life and soul to a bank.  You will pay all staff, overhead, licensing, in exchange you will be entitled to 100% of your non-guaranteed billings- success doubtful"

 

 

 

Edited by Rumpy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, thegoodlaw said:

I agree with most of what you said. 

But I do want to challenge your view that there are "many good employment opportunities in law" and that a "minority who can't find work at all". There is an unprecedented over-saturation of the legal market at the moment, in large part because the number of foreign-trained law students has gone up considerably and LSUC has provided them with a non-articling route to be called.

I have seen first hand people I know trying and failing to get a position, even though they are very competent and articled at reputable firms. For every associate position, there are 10 people being interviewed. 

So while some law students/new calls may have a sense of entitlement, we should still recognize that the legal market is a shitshow right now, and one where firms can get away with paying associates very little.

 

Unprecedented in what way? Maybe it's unprecedented for the legal market in particular, but it's not unprecedented in nearly any other context. 

What Diplock said is true: there are many good employment opportunities in law. I'd wager $1000 that at least 70% of 3L students at my school have articling jobs that pay at least $50,000 a year (pro-rated). That means most articling students are almost doubling the median individual income in Canada. There are a minority that can't find work at all: over 90% of my 3L class will have articling jobs at graduation. 

Meanwhile, you're suggesting that a 10:1 applicant:position ratio is somehow evidence of "unprecedented over-saturation?" That's absurd. In any other industry, interviewing 10 applicants for a single position would be indicative of a poor applicant pool. 

Suggesting that a 10:1 applicant to position ratio is unacceptable is itself indicative of a sense of entitlement. If you think that's a "shitshow," I highly recommend you never apply for positions outside of law. 

Edited by BlockedQuebecois
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thegoodlaw said:

I have seen first hand people I know trying and failing to get a position, even though they are very competent and articled at reputable firms. For every associate position, there are 10 people being interviewed. 

On the latter point, I wouldn't read much into that.  Many jobs have tens or even hundreds of applicant for them, that doesn't tell us much.  If that position were the only position being offered anywhere, that would be different.  But that isn't the case. 

And I agree, there are lots of competent people, who articled at reputable firms - including some of my articling students (I am not, apparently, god's greatest mentor) - who take a while finding positions.  But that's always been true, matching skills and interests, on the one hand, and demand, on the other, takes a while.  So people struggling for a year or two to find good positions isn't uncommon (though I'm struck by how many do find good positions eventually) or a sign of a dysfunctional market (and, aside, if competent people who articled with reputable firms are struggling to compete with LPP grads, well, damned, maybe there's something to the LPP).  

I don;t know that this is neccesarily unprecedented, though.  Back in the early 2000s, there was the double cohort year, with two years of bar calls in the same year (due to the LSUC's tri-annual radical overhaul of its licensing process). In the early 1990's there was a bloodbath in the legal market from the recession of the early 1990s.  No doubt the same was true a decade earlier.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Unprecedented in what way? Maybe it's unprecedented for the legal market in particular, but it's not unprecedented in nearly any other context. 

What Diplock said is true: there are many good employment opportunities in law. I'd wager $1000 that at least 70% of 3L students at my school have articling jobs that pay at least $50,000 a year (pro-rated). That means most articling students are almost doubling the median individual income in Canada. There are a minority that can't find work at all: over 90% of my 3L class will have articling jobs at graduation. 

Meanwhile, you're suggesting that a 10:1 applicant:position ratio is somehow evidence of "unprecedented over-saturation?" That's absurd. In any other industry, interviewing 10 applicants for a single position would be indicative of a poor applicant pool. 

Suggesting that a 10:1 applicant to position ratio is unacceptable is itself indicative of a sense of entitlement. If you think that's a "shitshow," I highly recommend you never apply for positions outside of law. 

You know Blocked, in your eagerness to parse the definition and meaning of every single word by a poster to the point of nuclear fission, you lose the plot (and my patience).

I was talking about the legal market, and not any other context.

I was talking about associate positions, not articling.

Also (and I don't normally do this, but you need to hear it - especially after your last gibe), perhaps - as a 1L - you're not in a very good position to comment on the state of the law associate job market. Perhaps, as someone ready to be called in June, I am.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thegoodlaw said:

You know Blocked, in your eagerness to parse the definition and meaning of every single word by a poster to the point of nuclear fission, you lose the plot (and my patience).

I was talking about the legal market, and not any other context.

I was talking about associate positions, not articling.

Also (and I don't normally do this, but you need to hear it - especially after your last gibe), perhaps - as a 1L - you're not in a very good position to comment on the state of the law associate job market. Perhaps, as someone ready to be called in June, I am.

So what's the plot? The associate market is in line with any other employment market? Except actually, it's not, because it's higher paid and has a lower applicant:position ratio? That's your plotline? And that constitutes a "shitshow," to you? 

And no, your lived experience really doesn't put you in a better position to comment on the state of the law associate job market. Maybe if I was disagreeing with any of your data points your lived experience would be relevant, but I'm not — I'm simply pointing out the absurdity of calling an above average employment market a "shit show" and being representative of an "unprecedented over-saturation" (which, as Bob noted, is not unprecedented in the legal market, let alone in the employment market generally).

Sometimes, lived experience can provide valuable insight. Other times, it blinds you to the reality of the world in front of you. I'd suggest this case is the latter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • For OLSAS, Dal and UNB, I just had to put my LSAC Number into the application. They'll do the search and get the result. Generally you'll have to indicate if you are going to write again, so that the schools know that they should check again for new scores. Some schools may also hold off on assessing your application if they know you have another score coming in.   
    • 아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라
    • 아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라
    • For Ontario Schools at least, on OLSAS you will have to input your LSAC account number which will send your score to OLSAS who will then proceed to forward the scores to the Ontario School(s) of your choosing. You also have to indicate on OLSAS any future LSAT test dates.  
    • 카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소
×