한국 로스쿨제도 개선 및 예비시험제도 도입에 관한 연구

Korean Government decided to introduce the American-style ‘law school system’ to reform the long-debated problems such as the abnormal legal education in the undergraduate course, the excessive competition in the bar-examination and the training system of successful applicants for the bar-exam. Therefore, Korean government approved only small number of law schools by establishing the high criteria which were very difficult to pass. Twenty-five law schools with 2,000students in Korea started in March of 2009. During 5-year-operation period, some problems of new law school system were found and some of them have been reformed so far. We can separate the problems of Korean law school into two categories. One group of problems is short-term problems which are necessary for the soft landing of new law school system. The other group of problems is fundamental problems including the assertion of abolition of law school system itself. When we try to find the solution to the problems of Korean law school system,we had better study the problems and solutions to the law school system of the U.S.A. and Japan. According to the book, 「Failing Law Schools」written by Professor Brian Z. Tamanaha of University of Washington(Saint Louis), many deep-rooted wrong-doings of American law school system have been revealed from 2011. For example, recently most of American top-ranking law schools manipulated the LSAT scores and GPA of new students and the percentage of employment of graduates to get the good rankings in <US & World Report>. Even though one-third of graduates could not find the decent lawyer jobs within 9 months after graduation, average debt of graduate of private law school reached 100,000 US dollars(70,000 US dollars in public law schools). This amount is too heavy burden for each graduate to repay after graduation. Recently the popularity of 200 American law schools has dropped drastically, so the number of applicantsof law school entrance examination also decreased to the level of the early seventies. However, with the help of ABA(American Bar Association), top-ranking private law schools lead high tuition trend for the benefits of professors. With the persistent pressure from mass-communication and criticism of conscientious professors, these deep-rooted wrong-doings of American law school system are likely to be corrected and reformed through the market-mechanism. From the opening of 68 law schools with 5,590 students in 2004, Japanese law schools have been in difficult situation because of the fundamental problems such as imbalance between the number of students(5,828) in 74 law schools from 2005 and the number of successful applicants(approximately 2,000) in Japanesebar-examination. On top of that serious problems, Japan decided to introduce the preliminary-exam. system for the regular bar exam. to give opportunity to the economically and socially disadvantaged people from 2011. Unexpectedly, the popularity of preliminary-exam. for the regular bar-exam. exceeded the regularbar-exam. The number of applicants for the preliminary-exam. outnumbered that of the regular bar-exam. So Japanese law schools called for the abolition of preliminary-exam. system for fear of the collapse of law school system itself. As above-mentioned, the problems of Japanese law schools have deteriorated since the opening year of 2004. Finally in August of 2012 the Central Governmentof Japan decided to establish ‘Committee of Ministers for the Reform of the Education and Training for the Legal Professionals’. And it was expected to finalize its duty in August of 2013. The Committee disclosed its final report in July 16th of 2013. According to the report, the Committee decided to maintainthe current law school system for the present. It decided to reform some easyproblems of law school system, however it delayed its final decision regarding the difficult tasks such as the optimum number of lawyers in Japan, the methods of reforming the low-performance law schools, preliminary-exam. system for the regular bar-exam. and so forth. Japanese Government decided to create the new special Committee composed of 6 related-Ministers and the Advisory Group composed of experts under its jurisdiction. The newly established Committee will deal with the fundamental reform plan of the Japanese law school system including the fore-mentioned difficult tasks. The new Committee was established in September of 2013 and it will last for 2years. From the lessons of the American and Japanese law school reform experiences, there can be two approaches for Korean law schools. In the short term, Korean law schools have to improve the urgent problems arising from the 5 years of operation. In the long term, the best policy for Korean law schools and Government is to wait and see the reform experiences of Japanese law school system. Solutions to the short-term problems of Korean law schools are as follows, ① to reduce the excessive financial burden of students (expensive tuition), ② normalize the curriculum operation (over-heated competition for good GPA andfor the preparation of bar-exam.), ③ to stop the discussion of additional approval of law schools and reopening of college of law under each law school, ④ to solve the serious financial difficulty of each law school, ⑤ to adopt the 2-year-course for the students with LL.B. and so on. And in stead of termination of Korean bar-exam. system in 2017, it is desirable that either the continuation of Korean bar-exam. system or the introduction of the preliminary-exam. system for regular bar-exam. Lastly, it is necessary that Korean Central Government should establish the special organization composed of related ministers to discuss the urgent and fundamental problems of Korean law school system. And it is advisable that National Assembly should establish the Special Committee to discuss the Reform Plan of the Korean law school system including the preliminary-exam. system for the regular bar-exam.