변호사시험법안의 문제점 분석

Abstract

This article focuses on reasons why a Bill for New Bar Examination was rejected and what problems this Bill has. In February 2009, the Bill for New Bar Examination was initially rejected during the National Assembly's plenary session. The legislation process has to start all over again. The main reason why the National Assembly did not pass the Bill is that lawmakers, government, and majoritarian people do not fully understand the purpose and function of 'Law School' and they have a wrongful myth for a current Bar Examination (Sa-bub-go-si). In the YS regime, the idea of 'Law School System' was initially introduced based on the purpose to strengthen the competitiveness of Korea. After the DJ regime, in the MH regime, the U.S.-style law school system was finally introduced to produce more lawyers and make high-quality legal services more affordable. The main function of law school is to stimulate the education of college based on diverse majors of college students. After passing law for law school system in 2007, new graduate level students are allowed to be candidates for lawyers in 2009. The law of New Bar Examination is demanded for such candidates for 2012. The current Bar Examination is considered time-consuming, waste of human resources, and expensive costs to pass it. These characteristics make it difficult for low budget students to prepare and pass the current Bar Examination. In order to improve these problems, law school system was initiated. However, some lawmakers and majoritarian people believe that qualifying only law school graduates to take the test would be biased against those who cannot afford to pay for an expensive three-year graduate program. They demanded the new bar examination be open to anyone, as it is now. The number of law makers, about 20 percent of the total law makers, is former lawyers. It is likely that they influence National Assembly not to pass Bill for New Bar Examination because of the anticipated increase in the number of lawyers. When the National Assembly passed a bill on Law School in 2007, these problems were already dealt. At that time, most of people and lawmakers agreed that legal services would be better and more available by changing the legal education not by changing Bar Examination. Even Ministry of Justice proposing New Bill on Bar Examination is likely to overlook this agreement. I believe that Ministry of Justice does not distinguish a New Bar Examination from a current Bar Examination. I cannot find any difference between new one and old one if considering the function and purpose of a Bill for Bar Examination.