FIDIC 조건을 사용하는 국제건설계약의 준거법 결정과 그 실익

석광현 사법발전재단 2014 사법 Vol.1 No.29

It is widely known that many Korean construction companies have won numerous overseas construction projects since the 1960’s, and it has been reported that the accumulated contract amount of the Korean construction companies all together reached 600 billion US Dollars in December, 2013. If Korea is truly a decent constitutional state, there should have been Korean lawyers whose prestige and reputation are widely acknowledged in the international construction community, which is apparently not the case at the moment. This is probably because the governing laws of the international construction contracts entered into by the Korean construction companies are frequently foreign laws, such as the laws of the state of construction site or English law. It is evident that in order to properly understand the rights and obligations of the parties and accurately assess the legal risks that either party bears, one must first know the contents of the relevant construction contract. In addition, one should know the law applicable to the construction contract and the contents of the applicable law. In this article, I explain principal terms and condition of the standard construction contract conditions drafted by the FIDIC (The International Federation of Consulting Engineers) and discusses various issues resulting from the determination of the law applicable to international construction contracts. In doing so, I will distinguish litigation on the one hand and arbitration on the other, because different choice of law rules are prevailing in litigation and arbitration. The most important principle is the principle of party autonomy in both litigation and arbitration; however, it should be remembered that in certain countries party autonomy is not allowed and parties are mandatorily required to apply the law of the country where the construction site is located. More concretely, I will discuss the following issues: first, the determination of the law applicable to international construction contracts in international litigation (Chapter Ⅱ); secondly, the determination of the law applicable to international construction contracts in international arbitration (Chapter Ⅲ); thirdly, the practical consequences from the determination of the law applicable to international construction contracts (Chapter Ⅳ); fourthly, the limit to party autonomy in international construction contracts; and finally, the internationally mandatory rules (Chapter Ⅴ). I hope that in the future Korean lawyers and practitioners will pay more attention to the various issues of international construction contracts and thereby will be able to accumulate more expertise on the international construction contracts. In this regard, I hope that the sub-committee on the international construction law established in September 2013 under the Korea International Trade Law Association could contribute to the future development of the international construction law in Korea. 주지하는 바와 같이 1960년대 이래 우리 건설사들은 중동 기타 전 세계에 진출하여 수많은 건설공사를 수주하였고 마침내 2013년에는 “대한민국 해외건설 누적수주액 6,000억 달러”를 달성하였다고 한다. 따라서 우리나라가 제대로 된 법치국가라면 지금쯤은 국제건설업계에서 저명한 국제건설계약법의 한국인 전문 법률가도 나왔어야 하나 현실은 그렇지 않다. 이는 아마도 우리 건설사들이 체결하는 국제건설계약의 준거법이 공사지국법 또는 영국법 등 외국법인 경우가 많기 때문일 수도 있다. 그러나 국제건설계약에 따른 당사자들의 권리와 의무, 나아가 각 당사자가 부담하는 법적 위험을 정확히 평가하자면 우선 관련 계약의 내용을 정확히 파악하여야 한다는 점은 명백하다. 그와 함께 당해 계약의 준거법과 그 내용을 정확히 알아야 한다. 여기에서는 국제적으로 널리 이용되는 FIDIC(국제엔지니어링컨설팅연맹, The International Federation of Consulting Engineers)이 작성한 표준계약조건을 중심으로 국제건설계약의 몇 가지 주요 논점을 소개하고, 그와 관련된 준거법의 결정방법과 그에 따른 실익을 검토한다. 그 과정에서 소송과 중재를 나누어 검토하는데 그 이유는 양 영역에서 상이한 준거법 결정원칙이 지배하고 있기 때문이다. 소송이든 중재든 간에 국제계약의 준거법 결정에 있어 가장 중요한 원칙은 당사자자치의 원칙이나, 일부 국가에서는 특히 소송의 경우 당사자자치가 허용되지 않고 공사지국을 반드시 적용해야 한다는 점도 잊지 말아야 한다. 보다 구체적으로 여기에서는 국제소송에서 국제건설계약의 준거법의 결정(Ⅱ.), 국제상사중재에서 국제건설계약의 준거법의 결정(Ⅲ.), 국제건설과 관련된 준거법 결정의 실익(Ⅳ.)과 국제건설계약에서 당사자자치의 한계, 국제적 강행법규의 문제(Ⅴ.)를 차례대로 논의한다. 앞으로는 우리 법률가들과 실무가들도 국제건설계약의 제문제에 대해 좀 더 관심을 가지고 전문성을 축적해 나아가기를 기대해 본다. 2013년 9월 국제거래법학회 산하에 설립된 국제건설법연구회가 그러한 개선에 기여할 수 있기를 희망한다.

2019년 로스쿨의 자화상 그리고 민사소송법학의 미래

한충수 한국민사소송법학회 2019 민사소송 Vol.23 No.1

In 2009 Korean New Law School System was adopted with a deep anxiety because most universities did not prepare for new educational system until then. Especially, we could not have time enough to make new lecture materials and to decide how to teach students. Many people argues that teachers in law school should change their lecture method and curriculum so as to educate prospective global standard lawyers efficiently. They also insist that professors of law school should teach practice fields such as the Korean Judicial Research and Training Institute(KJRTI) established by the Korean Government. However, law school is not a training institute but just educational graduate school of law. Furthermore, we teach graduate students who have studied diverse majors in undergraduate colleges unlike KJRTI, and then they should be educated in law from the beginning level. Therefore, we have to emphasize theory education rather than practice in civil procedure subject and other subjects although we should teach theory and practice coincidently in law school. The author thinks that we should educate law school students so as to think like a lawyer. Then what is the “hink like a lawyer”? There are five elements to thinking like a lawyer: judgment capacity, legal reasoning capacity, communication capacity, comprehension of professional norms and responsibilities and leadership. Each of these components has both knowledge and skills aspects. Now the purpose of law school can be more clearly stated: to teach prospective lawyers the knowledge and skills necessary to exercise sound judgment, develop sound legal reasoning capacity, communicate effectively, cooperate with colleagues and function at all times in accordance with professional norms and responsibilities. Now we stand here in the beginning of 2019. Ten years have passed since the new law school system begun. What was changed since then? And what happened in civil procedure subject and field? The author thinks that not changed furthermore even worse especially in civil procedure field. The lecture style had not changed and bar exam style got worse. In order to achieve our original goal in law school, a civil procedure subject should have a important role in law school because it has acted as a mediator between the legal theory and practice. First of all, we have to change curriculum so as to teach civil procedure-related subjects such as Civil Enforcement, Bankruptcy law, Arbitration and International litigation as well as civil procedure. And also we have to change teaching method so as to make a interactive classroom environment that thinking like a lawyer demands. The problem method based on the Socratic method could be the best teaching method to coincide with the purpose of law school.

촉법소년의 연령 하향

점승헌 사단법인 한국법이론실무학회 2022 법률실무연구 Vol.10 No.3

The public's shock and concern are increasing very much about a series of juvenile delinquencies that have occurred recently. A juvenile’s mental immaturity in comparison with physical development leads to lacking emotional control, being apt to commit impulsive crimes, and showing a tendency to be easily tempted by the surroundings. A reason that the issue of lowering the age of law-intruding juveniles among young offenders continues to emerge is because of a rapid rise in law-intruding juveniles. In accordance with the statistics by the National Police Agency and by the court of law, the law-intruding juveniles have been increasing every year for the last five years. Most of the law-intruding juveniles were 13 years old. They were analyzed to be 72.7% of the total law-intruding juveniles. Hence, the discussions about the age of law-intruding juveniles are being made. The National Assembly is also being proposed the amendments of the Juvenile Law and Criminal Law. Even the government came forward the preparatory work of lowering the age of law-intruding juveniles. The downgrade in the age of law-intruding juveniles is what reduces its scope by dropping the age limit for the criminal minors from 14 to 12. However, whether the lower limit of criminal sanctions, which may have an absolute influence upon juveniles’ life, will be set at what age corresponds to an area where the the self-responsibility principle and the protectionism are mixed. There is also a criticism as saying that the ideology of protectionism should be applied even to the criminal procedure as well as to the juvenile protection procedure. Nevertheless, if juveniles who committed a violent crime are not punished properly just because of being young, this could be rather aiding and abetting a crime. It might be the result of driving them down a worse path. Moreover, what raises the alarm by strictly enforcing the standard of the law against criminals who repeatedly commit violent crimes by exploiting the fact that they are juvenile perpetrators could be a way to reduce a crime even a little. It will be below examined the low age pattern and the ferocity phenomenon in law-intruding juveniles, the problem about which the law-intruding juveniles themselves are unconscious or abuse the criminality, and the issue of criteria for judging the liability incompetence. And after looking into the revised bill that is being proposed by the National Assembly, there will be a consideration on the issues that will need to be contemplated when coming to lower the age of law-intruding juveniles. The human rights of the perpetrators are important as well. But the law should protect the victim before that. A crime is thought to be likely declined given coming to be settled as the social norm the perception that committing a crime leads to being punished reasonably regardless of age. 소년범 중 촉법소년의 연령 하향 문제가 지속적으로 대두되는 이유는 촉법소년이 급증하고 있기 때문이다. 경찰청과 법원 통계에 의하면 최근 5년간 해마다 증가하고 있으며, 촉법소년 가운데 대부분이 13세로 전체 촉법소년의 72.7%로 분석되었다. 이에 따라 촉법소년 연령에 관한 논의들이 이루어지고 있으며, 국회에서도 소년법 및 형법 개정법률안들이 발의되고 있다. 정부에서도 촉법소년의 연령을 낮추는 준비작업에 나섰다. 촉법소년의 연령하향은 형사미성년자 연령 상한선을 14세에서 12세로 낮춰 그 범위를 축소하는 것이다. 그러나 소년의 인생에 절대적인 영향을 미칠 수 있는 형사제재의 하한을 몇 살로 할 것인지의 여부는 책임주의 원칙과 보호주의가 교차하는 영역으로 보호주의의 이념은 소년보호절차 뿐만 아니라 형사절차에도 적용되어야 한다는 비판도 있다. 하지만 강력범죄를 저지른 촉법소년을 나이가 어리다는 이유만으로 제대로 된 처벌이 이루어지지 않는다면 이는 오히려 범죄를 방조하는 것이 될 수도 있으며, 그들을 더 나쁜 길로 내모는 결과가 될 수도 있다. 또한 촉법소년이라는 점을 악용해 반복적으로 강력범죄를 저지르는 범죄자들에 대해서는 법의 잣대를 엄정하게 들이댐으로써 경각심을 일깨워 주는 것이 범죄를 조금이나마 줄일 수 있는 한 방편이 될 수도 있을 것이다. 따라서 촉법소년의 연령을 10세 이상 12세 미만으로 하고, 촉법소년 모두를 일률적으로 처벌하는 것이 아니라 촉법소년 중 중범죄를 범한 자에게는 성인범과 마찬가지의 처벌 아니면 이와 유사한 처벌을 받도록 하여야 한다. 또한 이와 연계하여 형사미성년자의 연령을 하향하는 방안도 심도 있게 검토되어야 할 것이다. 범죄를 범하였으면 연령에 관계없이 반드시 그에 합당한 처벌을 받는다는 인식이 사회적 규범으로 정착하게 되면 범죄는 감소하게 될 것이라 생각한다.

법률과 사실, 그리고 서사 ―법문학비평의 관점에서 본 전근대 동아시아의 범죄소설

박소현 ( Park Sohyeon ) 한국중국어문학회 2019 中國文學 Vol.98 No.-

법과 문학의 학제적 상호영향은 법의 권위주의를 타파하고 인간성을 회복하려는 노력의 일환으로 최근에 와서 활발해졌으며, 이러한 경향을 반영한 법문학비평은 법과 문학의 관계에 대한 새로운 관점과 담론을 제공하고 있다. 특히, ‘문학으로서의 법률’ 담론은 문학의 역할을 법의 실천적 영역으로 확대시켰다는 점에서 주목할 만하며, 이 중에서도 법에 대한 서사적 비평 혹은 ‘서사로서의 법률’ 담론은 법적 스토리텔링을 통해서 기존의 제도적 권위에 도전하고 사회적 형평성을 회복하고자 한다는 점에서 그 실천적 의미를 높이 평가할 만하다. 본고에서는 명청대 중국의 공안소설과 조선 후기 송사소설 등 전근대 동아시아의 범죄소설 장르가 법과 서사의 밀접한 연관성을 인정하는 문화적 맥락 속에서 발전한 사실에 주목하여 이 장르를 법문학비평의 관점에서 분석하고자 시도했다. 정·리·법의 섬세한 균형을 유지하는 것을 이상으로 삼았던 유교적 사법전통에서는 법적 스토리텔링의 역할은 억압되기는커녕 전통적으로 중시되었다. 본고에서는 또한 법적 스토리텔링의 한 이상적 사례로서 19세기에 창작된 우화적 송사소설인 《와사옥안》을 분석했다. 《와사옥안》은 법적 스토리텔링의 이상적 사례를 보여주는 이야기로 읽힐 수 있으며, 이런 점에서 최근 법적 스토리텔링의 분석에 주목하는 현대 법문화와 전근대 사법전통의 연결고리로도 해석될 수 있을 것이다. Recently, the interdisciplinary interaction between law and literature has tended to appear more active in an attempt to subvert the authoritarian rule of law and restore the humanity of law. The recent movement of literary criticisms of law has provided new perspectives and theoretical approaches. The “law as literature” perspective in this movement seems to draw our particular attention in that it enlarges the role of literature far beyond the literary realm. More importantly, the narrative criticism of law or “law as narrative” perspective takes activist positions by challenging the institutional authority and restoring social equity through legal storytelling or the use of narratives. This article attempts to interpret the genre of crime fiction of premodern East Asia from the perspective of literary criticisms of law. In fact, this genre, including Chinese court case (gong’an) fiction and Korean court case (songsa) fiction, was developed in the cultural contexts, in which the close interrelationship between law and narrative was well acknowledged. Indeed, the role of legal storytelling was considered significant in managing the subtle balance of sentiment·principle·law in the Confucian legal tradition. In this article, a nineteenth-century Korean court case story, A Criminal Case Record of Frog and Snake, is also examined as a prominent literary example revealing how the techniques of legal storytelling reflect the idea of law and justice in the traditional legal system.

法科大学院教育と早稲田大学の実務教育のための二つの法律事務所

Miyagawa Shigeo(宮川成雄) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2014 法學硏究 Vol.25 No.1

Japan launched the law school system in 2004, and 74 law schools were established. In the past ten years, thirteen law offices affiliated with law schools were also set up. There are two characteristics to define a "law-school-affiliated" law office. One is that the law office is opened on the campus of a particular law school, and the other is that the major purpose of the law office is to provide the practical training for students of the law school. There are three categories of the law-school-affiliated law offices. The first category is law offices that were established with a strong initiative of the law schools. The second is those that were established by a group of devoted practicing attorneys. The third is those established in the collaboration with a particular local bar association. The first category of law-school-affiliated law offices shows the strongest involvement to the legal education of the law schools where the law offices are established. Waseda University Legal Clinic Law Office is in the first category. Waseda University Legal Clinic Law Office was established in 2004 as the first law-school-affiliated law office in Japan. It is a legal entity independent of the Waseda University, because universities are not allowed to set up a law office. It collaborates with Waseda Law School in providing practical training for the law students. As well as the educational purpose, it aims to contribute to the public by providing free legal services to the local community, particularly to the people with low incomes. The Law Office receives compensations from the University for its practical education to the law students and provides legal services free of charge to the local community. In March of 2013, the second law office was established to collaborate with Waseda Law School in providing practical education for the law students. It is Waseda Legal Commons Law Office. It is financially independent of Waseda University but closely related with Waseda Law School in terms of both alumni relationship and the educational collaboration. Waseda Legal Commons provides three types of practical training. One is that many of the partners serve as academic advisor to the law students. The second is that Waseda Legal Commons accepts externship students all the year round, not limited to the summer or spring recess. The third is the "Commons' case project" in which Waseda students are trained in live client cases which Waseda Legal Commons' attorneys represent. The significance of having a "law-school-affiliated" law office for professional legal education is that this type of law office is the embodiment of the "bridge between theory and practice" in law. In this educational setting of teaching theory and practice of law, students can learn law incorporated with practical skills and professional responsibilities.

法科大学院教育と早稲田大学の実務教育のための二 つの法律事務所

宮川成雄 충북대학교 법학연구소 2014 法學硏究 Vol.25 No.1

Japan launched the law school system in 2004, and 74 law schools wereestablished. In the past ten years, thirteen law offices affiliated with lawschools were also set up. There are two characteristics to define a“law-school-affiliated” law office. One is that the law office is opened onthe campus of a particular law school, and the other is that the majorpurpose of the law office is to provide the practical training for studentsof the law school. There are three categories of the law-school-affiliatedlaw offices. The first category is law offices that were established witha strong initiative of the law schools. The second is those that wereestablished by a group of devoted practicing attorneys. The third is thoseestablished in the collaboration with a particular local bar association. The first category of law-school-affiliated law offices shows thestrongest involvement to the legal education of the law schools where thelaw offices are established. Waseda University Legal Clinic Law Office isin the first category. Waseda University Legal Clinic Law Office was established in 2004 asthe first law-school-affiliated law office in Japan. It is a legal entityindependent of the Waseda University, because universities are notallowed to set up a law office. It collaborates with Waseda Law School in providing practical training for the law students. As well as theeducational purpose, it aims to contribute to the public by providing freelegal services to the local community, particularly to the people with lowincomes. The Law Office receives compensations from the University forits practical education to the law students and provides legal servicesfree of charge to the local community. In March of 2013, the second law office was established to collaboratewith Waseda Law School in providing practical education for the lawstudents. It is Waseda Legal Commons Law Office. It is financiallyindependent of Waseda University but closely related with Waseda LawSchool in terms of both alumni relationship and the educationalcollaboration. Waseda Legal Commons provides three types of practicaltraining. One is that many of the partners serve as academic advisor tothe law students. The second is that Waseda Legal Commons acceptsexternship students all the year round, not limited to the summer orspring recess. The third is the “Commons’ case project” in which Wasedastudents are trained in live client cases which Waseda Legal Commons’attorneys represent. The significance of having a “law-school-affiliated” law office forprofessional legal education is that this type of law office is theembodiment of the “bridge between theory and practice” in law. In thiseducational setting of teaching theory and practice of law, students canlearn law incorporated with practical skills and professional responsibilities.

법학전문대학원에서의 이론교육과 실무교육의 조화 및 변호사시험

김동호 대한변호사협회 2010 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.406

1. 법학전문대학원에서의 이론교육과 실무교육의 조화법과대학이나 법학전문대학원이나 법학이 실용학문에 속하는 이상 실무지향적이어야 했다. 일반적으로 과거 법학을 수료한 학생들은 간단한 소장도 작성할 수 없었다. 이러한 실무교육의 부재는 마땅히 비난받아야 한다. 이러한 관점에서, 과거의 법률교육은 강단법학을 면하지 못했다. 교육내용이나 교육방법은 실용적인고려 없이 채용되었다. 이는 학생들의 수요가 무시되고 교육 공급자로서의 교수들의 여건과 생각이 절대적인 영향을 미친 결과였다. 때로는 실용적이지 못한 주제들을 다루면서 한 학기의 대부분을 보내버리기도 했다. 학생들은 단지 이론교과서를 읽는 것만으로 교수의 설명을 듣지 않더라도 법률개념과 법률이론을 충분히 이해할 수 있을 것이라는 사고가 지금 법학전문대학원 시대에 있어서도 남아 있는 것으로 생각된다. 이제는 법학전문대학원의 교육과정과 변호사시험제도가 실무교육을 요구하고 있다. 더욱이 과목간의 융합적 교육이 요구되고 있고, 실무가 출신 교수들이 현저히 많아졌다. 따라서 교육과정과 교육방법은, 3년이라는 짧은 교육기간 내에, 법률전문가에 요구되는 최소한의 수준으로 일반적인 법률이론에 관한능력뿐만 아니라 법률전문가로서의 능력까지도 습득되도록 확보되어야 한다. 그러나 우리는 미국 로스쿨의 것들을 무비판적으로 수입함으로써 우리의 전통적인 것들을 바꾸어 버리는 일이 있어서는 안 된다. 법률이론 과목에 있어서 사례와 판례가 교육내용으로 사용되고 문답식 방법이 교육방법으로 채택되는 것이 대표적으로 잘못된 예가 아닌가 생각하고 있다. 몇 가지 이유로, 그러한 것들은 우리의 법률이론 과목에는 적합하지 않다. 법률이론 과목에 있어서 미국 로스쿨에서의 교육내용과 방법들은 부수적으로 고려되면 충분하다. 사례와 판례는 강의의 효율을 높이기 위한 목적을 위하여서 적당한 정도로만 사용되어야 한다. 문답식 방법은 우리나라 법의 원리와 체계를 이해하는 데에는 효과적이지 못하다. 강의실 내에서의 이론교육은 교과서나 법조문들을 읽는 것만으로는 이해할 수 없는 것들을 선별하여 학생들로 하여금 그것을 이해시키는 데에 활용되어야 한다. 3년이라는 짧은 기간 내에 기본적인 법률과목의 기본적인 지식이 습득되려면, 법률이론 교과서는 볼륨이 적고 체계성을 갖추도록 학생들 편익의 관점에서 재작성되어야 한다. 2. 변호사시험제도변호사시험제도는 법학전문대학원의 교육에 직접적인 영향을 미친다. 현재 변호사시험을 주관하는 당국자들은 실무능력을 강조하고 있고, 그러한 방향설정은 옳다. 특히 논술시험에 있어서 기록형 문제를 모든 기본법 분야에 설정해 놓은 매우 놀랍고도 바람직한 것이다. 그러나 여기에는 실무가 출신 교수들과 법률실무가들의 적극적이고 희생적인 기여가 전제되어 있다. 선택과목 시험이 논술형으로 된 것은 이해할 수 없다. 변호사시험 과목에 그것을 포함한 것에 대하여 비판적으로 볼 때에는 더욱 그렇다. 선택과목의 시험은 과거 사법시험 제도에 있어서와 같이 선택형시험으로 지속하거나 그렇지 않으면 변호사시험 과목에서 아예 배제하는 것이 바람직하였다고 생각한다. 한편, 변호사시험에 관한 정보제공에 있어서는, 변호사 자격시험으로서의 시험 성격, 법학전문대학원의 목적 및 과거 사법시험 제도의 반성을 ... 1. Educational theory and practice of law for the harmony at Korean law-schools The law faculty belong to practical study, it had to be practice-oriented either at law-college or law schools in our country. Generally, a law student did not create a simple civil complaint in the past. This lack of practical training is to blame. As far as this point, the original law education should not be an entirely legal pulpit. In choosing a topic or teaching method, practical considerations were not oriented. These results grew out of the fact that students’ demands were ignored and out of the fact that the circumstances and thoughts of professors as the providers were absolutely influencing. With impractical subjects, sometimes they spent most of one semester. Now even in the time of law school, I think, it is residual the thought that the law students can understand the legal concepts and the legal theories enough, only by reading the legal text books, without legal professors’ explaining. Now the law school courses and the bar examination system are requiring practical training in our country. Moreover, the congruous education are required between each subjects, and the practice-experienced professors become remarkable. Thus, the curriculum and teaching methods must be equiped and improved enough, to achieve not only the legal capacity of general theory as well as legal expertise, at the minimum level required for legal experts, within a short period of three years. But we should not import uncritically the things of American law schools to change our traditional things that should not be changed. The typically wrong examples are just the trend that cases or precedents are chosen as contents and that the Socratic method is chosen as the method, at the legal education of theoretical subjects. I am thinking so. Pointed out above, due to several reasons, those do not fit the our legal education of theoretical subjects. Those are only the secondary ones at the legal education of theoretical subjects. Cases and precedents should be used by the appropriate level, for the purpose of improving the efficiency of the lecture. The Socratic method can not be an effective way to understand the principles and system of our laws. The theoretical education in the classroom has to be utilized to make students understand the selected things that could not be understood only by reading textbooks or provisions. Within a shorter period of 3 years, basic knowledge of basic legal subjects to be learned, the text book of legal theory should be reorganized for the benefits of students by reducing the volume and by enhancing systematical character. 2. Korean bar examination system The bar examination system directly affects the education in law schools. Now the authorities of bar-examination placed emphasis on the working skills, and that is the right direction. Especially, it is significant and desirable very much that the records type essay-exam are set for all of the basic law subjects. But here is the premise of the active contribution and sacrifice of the practice-experienced professors and the practicing lawyers.It cannot be understandable that the testing way of electives is essay type. Considering the criticism of including that in bar examination subjects, it is more so. It is desirable, I think, that selection-type-test of electives should be kept as in the past bar examination system, otherwise, electives should be excluded from the bar examination. Meanwhile, in providing information about the bar examination, when I synthesize the examination’s nature as the qualification test of a lawyer, the purposes of korean law school and the reflection of past bar exam system, and when I interpret the Korean Bar examination law §18②, finally I can make sure that the informations about the grades or rankings of individual subjects and about the overall position is to provide not for the passed but for the non-passed.

Law and Knowledge

Hans-Heinrich Trute 이화여자대학교 사회과학연구소 2016 사회과학연구논총 Vol.32 No.2

The relationship between law and knowledge is a new topic in the field of legal science, and it is dealt with in particular in public law as sub-discipline of law. The topic is definitely not new with regard to other scientific domains. Thus law might be seen as a late comer. This article intends to outline some aspects of the current discussion to provide the essential groundwork on the topic, initially by explaining why the interrelation between law and knowledge might be important. This article does not cover aspects of knowledge as an object of law, which is often discussed under this headline but focusses on more basic aspects of the relationship between knowledge and law that may summarized in the hypothesis that law shapes knowledge but also that knowledge shapes the law. Following an introduction on how ‘knowledge’ is to be defined as a term, the discourse moves on to examine law as a practice through which knowledge is constantly generated in multiple manners, while, immediately afterwards the different typologies of knowledge, from the most tangible(through experience and conventions) to the most articulate ones (through European administrative networks) are presented. It reveals an important requirement of creating a European Administrative space, which is a shared knowledge base where administrative actions are embedded in. Even if it may come as a surprise to some, ignorance, as the opposite of knowledge, can also be a process or element that plays a role in law generation, as the article further argues. Last but not least, an analysis of the preconditions necessary for observing the law and knowledge conundrum either under conditions of awareness or of ignorance is provided.

새로운 민법 교육의 체계와 방법 : 서울대의 경우

김재형 한국민사법학회 2009 民事法學 Vol.45 No.1

In March, 2009, Korea has adopted the law school system and the universities that have introduced the new system are currently undergoing a transition to discontinue their colleges of law. Consequently, as the traditional national judicial examination will soon be abolished, the Judicial Research and Training Institute, which is responsible for the legal practice training for those who pass the exam, is facing a big change as well. The establishment of the law school system can be a turning point for the Korean legal education and an impetus for "a new start." Especially, civil law, which constitutes a large part in law and legal education, is exposed to some problems of its education under the college of law system. As such, the matter of how to change the civil law education has become an issue, more of a task to be solved from the time when the law school opened. Also, Korea’s legal system is clearly distinguishable from the common law system by the fact that it belongs to the civil law tradition and has the civil code prepared according to the Pandekten system. Naturally, the introduction of the law school system which was created and developed in the United States leads to the inevitable question: How to change the civil law education? The structure and organization of civil law courses to be offered at Seoul National University School of Law is a lot different from the ones being taught in the College of Law now. Regardless of the system of the civil law and the organization of the civil code, the basic civil law courses are reorganized taking into account their applications on the real life situations. For instance, the Civil Law I (Contracts) includes the contents constituting the general provisions of the civil code and the law of obligations, and its system and content have been entirely rearranged in the way of looking into the ‘life of contract’ from its formation to expiration. This can be a revolutionary course showing how the common law reasoning and the continental civil law reasoning can combine successfully. The specific contents and methods of the lectures will be different from those of the civil law education in the College of Law. For teaching methods, professors may use either the lecturing method explaining legal theories and case laws or the Socratic method, or both. Various other methods including a problem-solving method may also be used. There is not only one superior method in education. Professors should use appropriate methods according to the situations. Only because, thus far, the traditional civil law courses have been lecture-oriented, it needs to recommend new methods of teaching including the Socratic method.

行政判例 30年의 回顧와 展望 - 行政救濟法: 韓國行政判例의 正體性을 찾아서

홍준형 한국행정판례연구회 2014 행정판례연구 Vol.19 No.2

Case law in Korean administrative law is the cardinal source of law, which as “lebendes Recht” shapes and leads the work of administrative law. It does not merely complement loopholes and shortcomings of statutory laws, but also embodies the Rule of Law vis-à-vis state power and public administration. Especially in the field of administrative remedy it has been playing the role of connecting law and practice, thus become a precious treasury of pathological precedents and solutions for administrative diseases. During the recent decades, the administrative case law made a remarkable progress towards consolidating the Rule of Law in Korea, by widening access to administrative litigations, reinforcing the system of law relating to state liability for damage and compensation for eminent domain. It also made enormous contribution to the theoretical development of Korean administrative law, though nevertheless, sometimes confronted by obstacles, suffering growing pains. The paper examines and reviews the case law developments made in the field of administrative remedy law during last three decades in Korea and tries to portray the identity of Korean administrative law in its distinctive aspects. 행정판례는 ‘살아 있는 구체화된 법’(Eugen Ehrlich)으로서 법치행정의 원칙을 구현하고 행정법의 흠결과 불비를 보완하여 전체로서 행정법질서를 형성, 향도해 나가는 행정법의 중추적인 원천이다. 특히 행정구제법 분야 행정판례는 역사적으로나 현실적으로 행정법의 발견과 적용에 대한 병리학적 증례들을 집적한 구체화된 행정법의 보고로서 행정법의 법리와 실무를 서로 연결시켜 주는 핵심적 고리 역할을 해왔다. 지난 30년 동안 한국의 행정판례는 괄목할 만한 발전을 이룩했다. 행정의 행정소송의 문호를 확대하고 국가배상책임과 손실보상을 강화하는 등 행정상 권리구제를 확충하는 한편 행정판례법을 통한 행정법이론의 발전에도 크게 기여하였다. 그럼에도 불구하고 행정판례는 성장통을 겪기도 했고 또 성장의 한계에 부딪히기도 했다. 이러한 관점에서 지난 30년간 행정구제법 분야에서 이루어진 행정판례의 발전 동향을 점검하고 그 과정에서 드러난 문제점과 과제를 검토하였다. 행정구제법 분야별로 주목할 만한 판례를 분석, 평가함으로써 이를 통해 형성되어 온 한국행정법의 독자성을 확인하고 향후의 전망을 시도하였다.