과태료의 실효성 제고수단에 관한 연구

정형근 성균관대학교 법학연구원 2009 성균관법학 Vol.21 No.3

The meaning for effectiveness of the negligence fine is to collect it for default in many ways of measures smoothly. Those are related with achieving the aim to regulate the violation of minor administrative codes. A prescription of cut for honest payers is meaning of effectiveness ; a favor to the people who waived the testimony for their formal objection to raising well correspond to the administrative convenience. Moreover, additional or aggravated additional due to the arrears, the restriction of government-licensed business, provision of credit information, detention to the high amount or habitual delayed payers are the newly adopted sanction to defaulters. Among them, additional or aggravated additional due are supplement sanction for financial allotment. A restriction of government-licensed business functions as a menace offenders' right to live with limiting in a wide range of freedom of business activities. Likewise, detention, recently established, could be the most powerful sanction by restricting individual liberty. It is ineffective, however, to the incompetents for money due. At any rate, the effectiveness shall settle down in purpose of guaranteeing administrative penalties as a waiting solution.

변호사와 의뢰인의 수임관계에 관한 고찰

정형근 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2010 외법논집 Vol.34 No.4

Lawyer's relationship with their clients stands at the heart of any discussion about legal ethics and professional responsibility. This study examines the relationship with clients from start to finish. In the first part, I consider the crucial issue of client selection and whether there are any compelling ethical responsibilities to reject or adopt certain potential clients or causes. Client selection is one of the most important and most neglected issues for lawyers. The second part deals with the broad topic of compensation and, after providing a realistic context for discussion, highlights the professional regulation of what amounts to fair and reasonable fees. In the third part, I look at the circumstances in which lawyers must or can withdraw their services from their clients. The fourth part is devoted to inquiring into whether lawyers have an obligation, through legal aid and pro bono work, to meet the needs of those people who cannot afford legal services. Finally, the fifth part examines the possibilities and prohibitions around solicitation and advertising by lawyers. Throughout the chapter, emphasis will be placed on the profession's and individual lawyers' ethical responsibility to give persons reasonable access to justice. They are engaged in a special relationship that lawyers cannot simply abandon as and when they choose. Lawyers are entitled to withdraw their services once they have entered into a professional relationship with clients. However, as might be expected, there are restrictions on the situations and the ways in which lawyers can withdraw. If one of the parties rescind a mandate for the further without any inevitable reasons when it would be unfavourable to the other party, he shall compensate the other party for any damage occasioned by such rescission. Lawyers can withdraw only where there are compelling and justifiable reasons to do so. While clients have a clear right to dismiss their lawyers as and when they wish, lawyers do not have an equivalent right to withdraw their services arbitrarily from their clients. For lawyers to choose to withdraw, there must have been "a serious loss of confidence between lawyer and client" such as the clients' persistent failure to follow the lawyers' advice, to provide necessary instructions, and, most important, to pay their bill after a reasonable time

법조 유사직역 자격사의 전관예우 근절방안에 관한 고찰 - 세무사, 변리사를 중심으로 -

정형근,서인겸 대한변호사협회 2021 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.501

A judge, a prosecutor, and an attorney-at-law performing the legal practice is called “legal professional”, while a tax accountant, a certified public accountant, a patent attorney, a licensed administrative agent, a licensed customs broker, a certified public labor attorney performing the legal practice in those relevant fields is called “similar certificates to the legal professional”. A similar certificate to the legal professional performs a part of works that an attorney-at-law performs. The preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials, which means that the attorney-at-law retired from legal officials like a judge and a prosecutor is treated as he or she keeps the position in the procedure and the conclusion of an investigation and a trial, is a serious problem. The preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials is one of the most typical corruption that occurs the distrust of the legal process and the officials. The preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials is found only in China and Nigeria, and it does not exist in the other states. Surveys shows that the reliability of the judicial system in Korea is only 27%, and it is ranked on 39th among the 42 states in OECD. The preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials is also found in the field of similar certificates to the legal professional. The preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials causes the public sector corrupted, leading to illegal solicitations and executions by them. As a result, a person who can pay for a tax accountant, a patent attorney receives preferential treatment, while a person who cannot is discriminated. Attorney-at-Law Act provides that an attorney-at-law retired from public office shall not accept cases handled by the agency where he or she has worked and is required to the information of the cases that he or she accepted, and the Certified Tax Accountant Act is regulating a tax accountant who resigned as a public official with new rules, including the prohibition on advertising any connections to the offices, but it is difficult to settle the problem of preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials only by those legislative methods. In order to find the fundamental solution, this paper will review the phenomenon of the preferential legal treatment of former judicial officials in the acquisition process of the certificates and the solution to eradicate it, after looking into the history of the similar certificates to the legal profession, concentrating on the tax accountant and the patent attorney among the similar certificates to the legal professional. 법과 관련된 직무에 종사하는 판사, 검사, 변호사를 법조인이라고 하고, 법조 유사직역 자격사는 법과 관련된 업무를 하는 세무사, 공인회계사, 변리사, 법무사, 행정사, 관세사, 공인노무사 등을 말한다. 법조 유사직역 자격사는 변호사가 수행하는 업무의 일부분을 맡고 있다. 판사, 검사에서 퇴직하여 개업한 변호사에 대하여 수사·재판의 절차·결과에서 마치 퇴임 전의 지위와 마찬가지로 대우를 해주는 전관예우의 문제가 심각하다. 법조인의 전관예우는 사법작용과 공직사회에 대하여 불신을 초래하는 대표적인 비리라고 할 수 있다. 법조인의 전관예우는 중국과 나이지리아에서 행해지고 있을 뿐 세계 어느 나라에서도 존재하지 않는 것이 현실이다. 우리나라의 사법신뢰도는 27%로 OECD 42개국 중에서 39위에 불과하다고 한다. 이런 전관예우는 법조 유사직역 자격사에게도 존재한다. 전관예우는 부정한 청탁과 그에 따른 직무수행으로 이어지게 되어 공직사회의 부패를 야기한다. 그 결과 돈이 있어서 전관예우를 받을 수 있는 세무사나 변리사 등에게 대리를 위임할 수 있는 경제적 여유 있는 사람은 우대를 받고, 그렇지 못한 사람은 차별을 받게 된다. 이를 개선하고자 변호사법에서는 공직퇴임변호사의 사건수임 제한과 수임자료 등의 제출의무를 부과하지만 제재수단이 없어 실효성을 크게 기대하기 어렵고, 세무사법 역시 공직퇴임세무사에 관한 규정을 신설하고 연고관계 선전금지 의무를 부과하고 있지만, 이런 제도적 방안만으로는 전관예우 문제를 해결하기는 어렵다고 할 것이다. 이러한 문제의 근본적 해결을 위하여 먼저 법조 유사자격사 제도의 연혁을 살피고, 그 자격취득 과정에서 발생하는 전관예우의 현상과 근절방안에 관하여 검토한 후 법조 유사자격사 중 세무사와 변리사에 대하여 구체적으로 살펴보았다.

공행정을 수행하는 사인의 법적 지위

정형근 경희대학교 법학연구소 2010 경희법학 Vol.45 No.2

It is a great modification on the administrative functions that private individual performs the administration rather than that of administrative authority. The authorities or rights of the nation, the inherent administrative authority, transferred to the local governments, public organizations and private individuals. There are two reasons why they delegated their powers. First, the lack of capability to handle the administrative demand not only in the professional or technological areas but also emerging spheres by traditional administrative organs. Further, it is necessary to use private individuals’ professional knowledges to perform duties in rapidity and efficiency. The acts such as the ‘Administrative Procedures’ and the ‘Administrative Dispute’, etc. are underpinned for the private individuals should implement administrative disposition as the administrative authority. It is possible to assert that official-trustee private individuals are on the greatest importance among the other private individuals who perform public affairs. The official-trustee private individuals are legally positioned as administrative authorities due to performing their delegated power to the public with their own names and obligation. In addition, official-trustee private individual have position as administrative officers. It may occur the obligation to compensate by their illegal disposition or torts. Whenever a natural person who is on the administrative officer’s position commit a tort during the performance of his/her duties, then the government has liability to compensate. However, if the corporation is an independent one that has juristic personality, then the corporation shall compensate for the damage. The private individual who is under obligation to charge public duties and the administrative assistant are not the authorities. Merely, they implement various duties or perform functions as administrative tools by the regulation which individual acts establishes. The duty that can charged to the private individual who is under obligation to charge public duties are suitable for him/her to dispose well. The administrative assistants are treated as public officers on the ‘State Compensation Act’ in the reason of their performing duties by administrative agencies command. Finally, there is utilization of specialist system that recruits the specialist who has professional knowledge forcibly to the enterprise or the field of construction. This system has a trait that burdens payment for the recruitment to the enterprise, not the administrative authority. This is the system that forwards to achieve the purpose of environmental or constructive administration under enterprises’ economical burdens.

염화제일주석 환원법을 이용한 수용액 중 정인산염인의 자동화 측정에 관한 연구

정형근,조영일 연세대학교 보건과학연구소 1995 보건과학논집 Vol.5 No.-

변호사의 이익충돌회피의무

정형근 경희대학교 법학연구소 2011 경희법학 Vol.46 No.2

There are four situations in which potential conflicts of interest might arise: acting for two current clients in related transactions; acting for two current clients in unrelated transactions; acting against former clients; and a clash between the clients’ and the lawyer’s own interests. Each of these is exacerbated by the recent rise of large law firms in which lawyers are not always sure about the identity, let alone the interests, of many of their colleagues’ clients. In each situation, the requirement to avoid conflicts of interest flows both from the duty to be loyal to the client and from the duty of confidentiality. Conflicts include the “duties and loyalties” of lawyers (and their partners and professional associates) to any other clients of their own or their law firm’s, even those involved in unrelated matters. As part of their fiduciary duty to their clients, lawyers must ensure that they avoid potential as well as actual conflicts. While in many cases it will be sufficient to inform clients of potential conflicts and seek their express approval to continue acting as their lawyer, there will be occasions on which lawyers will be expected to withdraw. Unfortunately, the doctrine surrounding conflict situations arose in simpler times and in simpler circumstances than the conditions of contemporary professional practice. Consequently, the doctrinal and ethical challenge is to adapt the basic principles to the more complex problems and possibilities that now arise. The development of recent jurisprudence has given added pertinence to these issues. Accordingly, rather than follow a separate conceptual typology, it is more illuminating to frame the discussion around the courts’ unfolding approach to the conflicts doctrine 변호사는 헌법상 국민의 신체의 자유를 보장하는 제도로 인정되고 있다. 변호사는 공무원이 아닌 사인이면서도 그 직무의 공정성과 공공성이 확보되어야 한다. 그 때문에 변호사법은 변호사에게 직업윤리의 준수를 요구하고 있다. 변호사는 의뢰인을 위하여 높은 법률전문지식과 뛰어난 소송수행 능력을 가지고, 의뢰인의 대리인으로 선관주의의무를 다하여야 한다. 특히 변호사는 의뢰인의 이익을보호하는데 최선을 다하는 충실의무를 준수하여야 한다. 바로 이 같은 관점에서도출되는 것이 이익충돌회피의무이다. 이는 변호사의 사건수임을 제한하는 것으로 나타난다. 변호사의 사건수임을 제한하는 것은 그의 직업행사의 자유를 제한하는 것에 해당된다. 그렇지만 의뢰인의 이익과 변호사 제도의 신뢰확보는 더욱중요하다. 의뢰인의 사건을 수임하여 처리중에 있을 때, 그 적대적 관계에 있는상대방이 동일한 사건의 대리를 요청하는 것은 쌍방대리에 해당된다. 쌍방대리는민법에서도 금지되는 것이 원칙이다. 그러나 상대방이 수임을 의뢰하는 사건이종전의 사건과 동일성이 없을 때는 의뢰인의 동의를 얻어서 수임할 수 있다. 의뢰인의 동의는 수임제한을 해제하는 열쇠가 된다. 이익충돌은 대형 로펌에서 발생할 가능성이 크다. 특별히 법관 등 공무원으로 재직 중에 취급하였던 사건의수임제한은 공정한 공무수행에 절대적으로 필요하다. 이에 대한 수임제약은 변호사법과 변호사윤리장전에 상당히 엄격하게 규제하고 있다. 지난 2011.5.17. 개정ㆍ시행된 변호사법은 공직퇴임변호사의 수임제한을 신설하였다. 이는 전관예우를근절하기 위한 것으로 이익충돌회피를 규율하기 위한 것이라고는 볼 수 없다. 현실적으로는 광범위한 수임제한으로 인한 그 위반여부가 문제된다. 특히 개인 법률사무소를 운영하는 변호사들과 법무법인 등 대형로펌 간의 이해관계가 첨예하게 대립하는 부분이기도 하다. 이익충돌회피의무의 실효성은 수임제한을 위반한소송행위의 효력과 관련된다. 수임제한 사유를 가진 변호사의 소송행위가 무효로 된다면 상대방도 다른 변호사에게 사건을 위임하게 될 것이다. 그렇지만 현재의판례는 원칙적으로 그러한 행위는 무효이지만, 당사자가 그런 사실을 알거나 알수 있는 상태에서 이의를 제기하지 않을 때는 유효한 것으로 본다. 그렇기 때문에 수임제한제도의 운용이 당사자의 처분에 맡겨져 있는 결과가 된다. 그렇지만이익충돌회피의무의 취지가 당사자의 이익옹호에 있다는 점을 고려하면 이해될수 있는 점이기도 하다

최근 미ㆍ일의 대(對)한반도 정책과 북한 동향

정형근 한국지역사회연구소 1997 지역사회 Vol.27 No.-

변호사의 절대적 수임제한사유에 관한 연구

정형근 대한변호사협회 2015 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.447

A conflict of interest could arise in the course of attorneys accepting cases. TheAttorney-at-law act has the provision which is unconditional ban on accepting cases, meanwhile itallows accepting cases when an attorney could gain the client’s consent. And also the an acceptingcase could be limited for political issue related to support law market. The typical reason of restriction on acceptance of case is representation of both parties in the same case(The Attorney-at-law act 31. 1. 1.). ‘The same case’ means that major issues of each cases basedon same factual grounds and does not relate to the object of a lawsuit or legal procedures. However,by civil law, an attorney is allowed to be both agent only when he/she could gain the client’s consentor complete fulfillment of obligation. Also by The Attorney-at-law act, an attorney can represent bothparties for discharging of obligation. An attorney who was affiliated in a law firm and in charge of thespecific case could go over to another law firm, then he/she works for the opposite side. In this case,there is possible violation of The Attorney-at-law act, therefore, lawyer’s turnover to the other lawfirm who represents opposite party should be prohibited. Restriction of acceptance of case related to an attorney who was a public officer is importantbecause he/she could illegally use his/her previous job for client’s interest. An attorney who was apublic officer can not accept the case which he/she was involved in the past. A law clerk is contractual service which duty is limited to assistant to judges and an attorney whowas a law clerk can not accept the case which he/she took part in when he/she was a law clerk. Thefact, that an attorney affiliated with a joint office of an attorney-at-law is now able to accept the casewhich another attorney was involved in when he/she was a public servant, is an unjust in theconsideration of other law firms. This is need to be modified by revising the law. Prohibition of taking assignment of claims is an one of reasons that an attorney should not acceptthe some cases. An assignment of claims is a the object of a lawsuit which an attorney is involvedin. If an attorney takes an assignment of claims, he/she would be the parties to a suit, not thelitigation representatives. Because of preventing conflict of interests between an attorney and his/ herclients, an attorney could receive a criminal penalty if he/she takes an assignment of claims. 변호사는 의뢰인으로부터 사건을 수임하는 과정에서 이익충돌이 발생할 수 있다. 변호사법은절대적으로 수임할 수 없는 사유와 당사자의 동의를 얻으면 수임할 수 있도록 하는 규정을 두고 있다. 그리고 수임질서를 해치는 것을 방지하기 위한 정책적인 목적으로 수임제한을 하기도 한다. 수임제한의 가장 대표적인 사유는 변호사법 제31조 제1항 제1호의 동일한 사건의 수임금지이다. 동일한사건에서 양 당사자를 대리하는 것은 쌍방대리에 해당된다. 동일한 사건이란 분쟁의 실체를 이루는 기초적인 사실관계가 동일한 것을 말한다. 사건의 동일성은 소송물이나 소송절차를 기초로 판단하지 않는다. 그런데 민법에서는 쌍방대리라도 본인의 승낙이 있거나 채무의 이행은 가능하다는 예외를 두고 있다. 변호사법에서도 채무의 이행에서는 쌍방대리가 가능하다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 로펌간의 변호사 이직으로야기된 수임제한의 문제도 중요하다. 그 사건의 담당변호사였던 자가 상대방 대리인 로펌으로 이직할 수있다. 이 경우에는 쌍방대리의 금지를 위반하였다고 볼 수 있는 여지가 있다. 그 때문에 수임사건 진행 중에는 상대방 로펌으로 이직을 금지시킬 필요가 있다. 그리고 공무원 등으로 재직하였던 자가 변호사가 된 후 발생하는 수임금지사유도 중요하다. 의뢰인의이익을 위하여 공직을 이용하는 것을 금지하기 위한 것이다. 공무원으로 재직시에 실제로 취급했거나 장차 취급하기로 예정된 사건은 수임이 제한된다. 재판연구원은 법관의 보조적인 직무에 국한되어 있는 계약직 공무원이다. 그런데 재판연구원이 변호사가 된 후에는 취급했던 사건의 수임이 금지된다고 보아야한다. 공동법률사무소는 공직퇴임변호사가 직무상 취급한 사건이라도 다른 변호사가 수임할 수 있다. 이는 다른 법무법인 등과 평등의 원칙에도 반하는 것이므로 수임제한을 받는 내용으로 개정될 필요가 있다. 수임제한의 특수한 경우로서 계쟁권리의 양수금지가 있다. 계쟁권리는 변호사 자신이 수임하여 처리 중에 있는 소송의 목적물을 말한다. 계쟁권리를 양수한 변호사는 대리인의 지위에서 소송 당사자의 지위로전환될 수 있다. 그래서 변호사와 의뢰인의 이익충돌의 유형으로 분류된다. 이 제한을 위반하면 형사처벌을 받는다.

독립국가연합(CIS)지역 고려인 후속세대를 위한 모국수학과정 교육프로그램 개선 방향

정형근 한국언어문학교육학회 2012 한어문교육 Vol.26 No.-

국민장기요양보험법안(가칭)을 마련하면서

정형근,Jeong, Hyeong-Geun 대한병원협회 2006 대한병원협회지 Vol.35 No.3