전환기, 법학의 학문성 재고 : 신진학자들의 연구유형에 대한 통시적 비교분석을 매개로 하여

More than 15 years have passed since the transformation of the legal education system. This change has significantly affected not only the institutional path for training lawyers but also various subfields related to legal education and legal scholarship. Master's and doctoral programs in graduate schools have been impacted, and there is also a noticeable shift in the training of the next generation of scholars and new legal academics. This development inevitably influences the nature and methodology of legal research, and in this context, concerns are often raised. It is claimed that the academic rigor of legal scholarship is eroding. However, when reviewing various legal journals, it is evident that a considerable amount and volume of legal research is still being conducted. Before drawing hasty conclusions about a crisis in the academic rigor of legal studies, it is essential to analyze the following points: What types of legal research are predominantly being conducted today, and on which methodologies are they based? In which areas of previous legal research are weaknesses observed, and in which areas are there strengths? Are there possible measures and institutional efforts to address these weaknesses? Positive aspects should be further expanded, while negative aspects must be addressed with corrective measures. However, these efforts must not be based solely on stereotypes or preconceived notions. They must be grounded in an objective understanding of reality. This study aims to make a small contribution in this regard. The focus of this research is to examine the changes observed in new legal researchers and their published works compared to those from approximately 20 years ago. Due to limited research resources, a comparison will be made between the research outputs of newly appointed professors at around ten law schools over the past five years and the research produced by professors appointed at these schools roughly 20 years ago. However, before conducting such a comparison, it is necessary to first structure and categorize the different types of legal research and the methodologies underlying them. The study begins by categorizing the possible forms and methodologies of legal research. It then analyzes how the research output of newly appointed professors compares to that of professors appointed 20 years ago and how the proportions differ. Finally, the study explores academic and institutional approaches to strengthening the academic rigor of legal scholarship.