원문 내용 공개(PDF 파일 등)는 민주법학 통권 제36호 발간 후에 이루어집니다.
민주법학 통권 제35호는 온라인서점 등에서 구입하실 수 있습니다.
민주법학 통권 제34호까지의 원문 내용은 본 자료실에서 확인하실 수 있습니다.

<국문초록>

로스쿨이라는 새로운 법학교육 시스템의 도입이 확정되었지만 이 새로운 시스템은 결국 변호사자격시험으로 완성된다. 이 시험의 성격과 방식은 로스쿨의 교육과정에 큰 영향을 주는 것은 물론 로스쿨의 성패를 좌우할 수도 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 로스쿨의 2009년 개원과 총정원 2000명이 확정된 지금까지도 변호사자격시험법의 입법방향이 구체화되지 않고 있다.

이 글은 변호사자격시험의 올바른 설계야말로 향후 법조인양성시스템의 성패를 좌우할 것이라는 인식하에 변호사자격시험의 입법방향을 모색한 것이다. 먼저 변호사자격시험을 설계할 때 전제되어야 할 몇 가지 기본원칙을 도출해 낸 후에, 이들 원칙을 바탕으로 올바른 입법방향을 제시하고, 나아가 변호사 이외에 법관과 검사의 양성 및 선발과 관련하여 다소 거친 형태지만 일정한 방안을 제시하였다.

이 글에서 제시한 핵심적 내용은 다음과 같다.

첫째, 새로운 변호사자격시험은 공무담임권과 직업선택의 자유를 침해하지 않는 것이어야 한다.

둘째, 새로운 변호사자격시험의 성격은 완전한 자격시험이 되어야 하며, 어떤 종류의 정원 제한도 있어서는 안된다.

셋째, 응시자격은 로스쿨졸업자 뿐만 아니라 일정한 법학과목을 이수하고 예비시험에 합격한 모든 사람에게 부여되어야 한다.

넷째, 시험은 변호사로서 갖추어야 할 최소한의 소양을 검증하는 정도의 것이어야 한다.

다섯째, 성적의 반영이나 응시횟수의 제한은 지양해야 한다.

여섯째, 실무연수는 변호사자격 취득과는 철저하게 분리되어야 하며, 장차 전문분야연수로 나아가야 한다.

주제어: 변호사자격시험, 공무담임권, 직업선택의 자유, 로스쿨, 사법시험

<Abstract>

Designing the New Bar Exam

Kim, Jong-Seo

Professor, Pai Chai Univ.

The Law School System will be completed through the bar exam. The basic character and method of the bar exam would have great influence on the operation of law schools and would even determine the fate of law school system itself. Though the opening schedule and sum quotas of law school students have been determined, what the new bar exam will be like has never been decided.

This article was written under this circumstance to rightly design a new bar exam that would determine the fate of future system for cultivation of prospective lawyers. For this purpose, a socio-legal method was adopted and a comparative study of three countries, USA, Japan and Korea, was conducted.

As basic principles on which the design should be based, I suggest three elements.

First, the priority is given to the fundamental human rights guaranteed by the Constitution. That means the exam should be designed in order not to infringe on the people's rights to choose occupation freely and to hold public office.

Second, the new bar exam should have the character of an exam confirming basic legal knowledge of examinees for lawyers, the level of which may not be considerably high. Considering this, those who have not completed law school curricula should also be eligible for the exam.

Third, to prevent differentiation among various subjects and thereby to guarantee fair competition, all the subjects should be compulsory, allowing no elective subject.

Under these principles, I tried to design the new exam as follows:

1) The bar exam should be provided as a part of the Attorney Act, not as a part of such independent legislation as the Bar Exam Act;

2) The bar exam should be a qualifying examination in character, which means no number limit shall be allowed;

3) Anyone who has passed a preliminary exam after having studied the required law subjects should be eligible for the bar exam, as well as those who have graduated from a law school;

4) Limitations of the times and period of taking the preliminary or bar exam shall not be allowed;

5) Practice training should not be required as a precondition to be qualified as a lawyer. It can be allowed to require a lawyer to be trained prescribed in the law for qualifying her/himself as a specialized lawyer in a specified field such as human rights law, labor law, environmental law, etc.

Regarding the subjects for the exam, I suggested some ideas through a comparative study of bar exams in the USA, Japan and Korea, as follows:

1) A multiple choice test should be taken for basic law subjects such as Constitutional law, Civil law, Criminal law and Procedural law. Specialized subjects like administrative law or Commercial law are not appropriate for the basic exam subject.

2) A Professional Responsibility Test will be taken for the purpose of prevention of malpractice of lawyers, but legal ethics exam should be replaced with a human rights education;

3) A Professional Ability Test shall be taken to confirm the examinee's ability of writing a variety of legal documents, which can be tested by multiple choice test;

4) A test shall be taken to verify the ability of examinee to solve the practical problems under diverse circumstances;

5) The preliminary exam should be taken for the subjects that cannot be studied except in law schools, among which are legal research and legal writing;

6) Foreign language test will not be necessary.

What we need is not a law school, but a bar exam operated in the character of qualifying examination.

Key Words: Bar Exam, Qualifying Examination, The Right to hold Public Office, Freedom of Occupation, Law School