외국법자문법률사무소의 법적 성격과 규제 - 현행법의 합리적인 해석과 개선 방안 -

Abstract

The Foreign Legal Consultant Act contains several provisions which may be subject to different interpretations in terms of the legal status and nature of a ‘foreign legal consultant office’. Since the legislative intent of the Foreign Legal Consultant Act was to allow a foreign law firm to establish a representative office in Korea and the Act contains an express provision to such effect, a ‘foreign legal consultant office’ should be treated as a Korean representative office of a foreign law firm. Various provisions of the Foreign Legal Consultant Act with respect to the establishment and operation of a ‘foreign legal consultant office’ and the liabilities relating thereto should be interpreted and to some extent improved in line with its legal status and nature. It would be more logical for the foreign law firm to be the applicant for the establishment of a ‘foreign legal consultant office’ in Korea rather than an individual foreign legal consultant belonging to such foreign law firm. Article 23(3) of the Foreign Legal Consultant Act should be applied to the extent consistent with the legal status and nature of a ‘foreign legal consultant office’ and it would be preferable if it was replaced with a provision relating to the liabilities of the foreign law firm that established its office in Korea and the foreign legal consultants employed at such office. Certain provisions of the Attorney-at-Law Act relating to the operation of law offices should be made applicable to ‘foreign legal consultant offices’ in Korea. In addition, it is necessary to revise the Act so that ‘foreign legal consultant offices’ are subject to sanctions and business suspension orders.