리걸클리닉의 현황과 과제

오지용(Oh, Ji-Yong) 동아대학교 법학연구소 2013 東亞法學 Vol.- No.61

법학전문대학원의 임상실습기관으로서의 리걸클리닉의 설치가 제도화 되었으나 리걸클리닉 자체가 독립된 법인도 아니고, 법학전문대학원의 실무경력교원은 현행제도상 변호사를 겸직할 수 없으며, 예산문제로 인해 변호사를 고용할 수도 없는 상황이므로 리걸클리닉이 직접 송무활동을 할 수 없는 상황이다. 따라서 리걸클리닉이 제대로 된 임상실습기관의 역할을 하지 못하고 있는 실정인바, 리걸클리닉이 제대로 된 임상실습기관으로서 기능하기 위한 제도적 방안을 찾아야 할 필요가 있을 것이다. 리걸클리닉을 공공봉사목적의 공법인으로 설립할 수 있도록 하고 실비변상 성격을 벗어난 수익활동을 할 수 없도록 하면서 경제적으로 어렵거나 법을 몰라서 법의 보호를 충분히 받지 못하는 자에게 법률구조를 하는 법률구조법상의 법률구조법인으로 등록하여 법률구조활동을 할 수 있게 하면 리걸클리닉은 법률구조활동을 통해 사회에 봉사하면서도 일상실습기관으로서 충분히 기능을 할 수 있게 된다. 그리고 실무경력교원에게 변호사 겸직을 허용하되, 변호사활동을 하더라도 수익활동을 할 수 없도록 제한하는 제도가 마련된다면 변호사단체의 견제가 크지 않을 것이기에 실무경력교원이 리걸클리닉의 송무활동을 담당할 수 있게 될 것이다. 즉 법학전문대학원의 실무경력교원에게 수익활동을 하지 않는 범위 내의 변호사 활동을 허용하는 제도를 마련하고 리걸클리닉을 공법인 형태의 법률구조법인으로 전환시킨다면 리걸클리닉은 법학전문대학원생의 제대로 된 임상실습기관으로서 자리매김 할 수 있을 것이다. When the law school system was first introduced, little attention had been given to the role of legal clinics. However, by the time the law school were launched taking their role as a legal education institution, the need for legal clinics that could provide clinical education to students has drawn a great deal of attention, resulting in the institutionalization of the legal clinics. Although being established as a clinical legal edycation institution, legal clinics are currently unable to provide litigation services on their own, because under present circumstances clinical professors of a law school are not permitted to practice law, nor can the legal clinics hire outside attorneys due to lack of funding. Consequently, legal clinics cannot properly function as a clinical legal education institution. Given the situation, we have to find institutional measures in order that the legal clinics may play their proper role as a clinical education insitution. If we permit legal clinics to register as a public corporation dedicated to public service, and strictly limit their activities to a non-profit sector making them not to take economic compensations other than the restitution of actual expenses, and allow them, as legal aid corporationsm to provide legal services to those who are economically underprivileged or legally under-represented, then the legal clinics could properly function as both a public legal service provider and a clinical education institution. And, if such a system is established as to allow clinical professors to practice law in court while barring them from profit-seeking activities, resistance from lawyer groups would be minimized, ultimately enabling clinical professors’ participation in litigation services to their clients. That is, if we build a system that allows clinical professors to practice law in non-profit areas, and transform legal clinics into legal aid corporations in the form of a public corporation, legal clinics would be able to reestablish themselves as a proper clinical legal education institution for law students.

리걸클리닉 활성화를 위한 법적,제도적 방안에 관한 연구

박선아 ( Sun Ah Park ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2014 법학논총 Vol.31 No.1

6 years have passed since the law school system was introduced and the 3rd period lawyers will be produced in this year of 2014. However, we can say dispassionately that the clinical legal education still stays at an early stage because there are almost no legal clinics that are properly operated in the entire country. In law school education, the legal clinic system is in stark contrast with the ``college of law - national bar examination - the judicial research and training institute`` system. Educating the law in clinical method as if it were a medical education is a method that has not been attempted by existing colleges of law. The legal clinic is a process to let the students directly experience through actual cases how their legal knowledge learned in the school classes is practically applied in solving the problem. This study will suggest the method of legal and systematic revitalization of legal clinic. In Chapter II, this study will first examine the minimum conditions for revitalization of legal clinic on the basis of legal clinic assessment standard and the current status of its operation. In Chapter III, East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC), the legal clinic of the Berkeley University Law School of the United States we visited for this research, and the legal clinic of the Northwest University of Political Science and Law of China will be introduced. In Chapter IV and V, this study will focus on the legal and systematic sides among the conditions necessary for revitalization of legal clinic. Specifically, this study will deal with the issues of permission of litigation representation and its legal ground, such as the arrangement of legal ground to allow the full-time teaching staff of the law school to carry out the practice of lawyer for representation of public cases and enactment of probationary rules for law school students, the amendment of Attorney-at-Law Act that allows the establishment of the law office specializing in public cases and the necessity and possibility of law firm establishment in universities, and a method to attract the national and social support for stable financial investment, as divided separately into human and material perspectives. The legal clinic is a living and dynamic educational site where various ideas and educational methods can be attempted for application. The revitalized legal clinic will play a great role in development of practical law school education and in training the society-participative, capable, and ethical lawyers.

리걸클리닉의 운영사례 및 문제점과 개선방안

계경문 인하대학교 법학연구소 2012 法學硏究 Vol.15 No.1

우리나라는 지난 2009년 3월 법학전문대학원 설치ㆍ운영에 관한 법률에 의해 법학전문대학원이 개원함으로써 본격적인 법학전문대학원 체제로 들어서게 되었다. 법학전문대학원의 실무교육은 법조인으로서 갖추어야 할 전문기술을 함양하는 교육이라고 할 수 있다. 법학전문대학원 설치법령상 교육과정은 실습과정, 즉 임상교육을 통하여 사회에 봉사하는 기회를 제공하여야 하는 의무를 갖게 되며 그 방법으로 로이어링(lawyering)과 리걸클리닉(legal clinic)이 있다. 로이어링과 리걸클리닉은 개념상 구별되는 바, 둘 다 법조인으로서 갖추어야 할 실무능력을 제고하기 위한 교과목이라는 점에서는 같지만, 교육방법에 있어서 차이가 있다. 리걸클리닉을 교과과정에서 배운 법이론을 실제 사건에 적용해보는 단순한 실습교육으로 이해해서는 안된다. 실제 사건은 교과서 등에 나오는 사례형 문제처럼 배운 법이론을 그대로 적용하면 답이 쉽게 나오는 사건은 아니다. 동일한 사안에 관하여 판례가 없는 경우가 많으며 사건을 해결하려고 하는 과정에서 국내외 판례와 이론에 대해 많은 연구를 하여야 한다. 또한 가능한 해결책을 찾아가는 과정에서 법리논쟁을 벌일 수 있다. 강의실에서 이루어지는 이론실무교육만으로는 실질적인 실무교육이라고 할 수 없으므로 임상교육의 중요성이 강조되며 그러한 점에서 리걸클리닉이 중요한 역할을 하게 될 것이다. 그러므로 리걸클리닉은 교육적인 측면에서의 기능이 우선시 되어야 한다. 다른 한편으로 리걸클리닉은 사회적인 측면에서 그 기능을 수행하여야 한다. 즉, 기본적으로 기존의 법률상담소가 해왔던 법률상담의 기능을 그대로 수행함으로써 학교내 뿐만 아니라 지역사회의 법률구조 사업을 펼쳐야 할 것이다. 필자의 리걸클리닉 운영경험 결과 성과를 낸 것도 사실이나 많은 문제점이 드러난 것도 사실이다. 리걸클리닉을 학교기구로 설립하여 상설기구화 시키고 전문지식을 가진 직원을 상주시킴으로써 내실있는 리걸클리닉의 운영이 가능하도록 해야한다. 또한 학생들의 참여를 유도하기 위하여 학점부여 문제를 해결하여야 할 것이다. 특히 체계적인 리걸클리닉의 소송수행을 위해 지도교수의 소송수행 문제를 해결하는 것이 필요하다. 향후 법학전문대학원이 안정적으로 정착하기 위해서는 이론교육과 실무교육의 조화와 체계적인 임상법학의 정착이 필요할 것이다. Korea Last March 2009, With the introduction of Korea Law School System was authentic by “ACT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF LAW SCHOOL”. Practical training in law to be equipped as a legal education is to cultivate professional skills. In law school laws curriculum during the lab, ie, through clinical education provides an opportunity to serve the community will have an obligation to be. And that way is lawyering and legal clinic. Lawyering and legal clinics are conceptually distinct. Both need to be equipped as legal knowledge and practical skills to enhance the sense of course, but, there are differences in teaching methods. Legal Clinic for the curriculum taught in legal theory applied to real events should not be understood as a simple hands-on training. Actual events, etc. coming out of the textbook examples, like a learned, you accept the legal theory of the events is not easy to answer. About the same issue is often no precedent in the process of trying to settle the case for domestic and international case law and theory should be a lot of research. In addition, from finding a possible solution could argue doctrine. Practical training takes place in the classroom theory alone can not be called a practical hands-on training emphasized the importance of clinical education and legal clinics that respect is an important role. Therefore, in terms of legal clinics education function should take precedence. Legal Clinic on the other hand, the social aspects of its functions shall be performed at. Essentially, the existing laws were doing counseling as legal counsel by performing the functions of the school community as well as a business should show a legal framework. Results of operational experience and the author of the Legal Clinic, but it does have some problems. Legal Clinic was established as a standing body schools and organizations with expertise in substance by resident legal clinic staff must be made operational. It also engages students in order to solve the problem should be given credit. In particular, a systematic legal advisor to carry out the clinic's lawsuit perform the action is necessary to solve the problem. Law School of the future in order to reliably establish the harmony of theory and practical training and the system will require the establishment of clinical law.

ロー·スクール敎員と弁護士實務

木佐茂男(키사 시게오) 동아대학교 법학연구소 2013 東亞法學 Vol.- No.60

일본에서 2004년에 발족한 로스쿨(법과대학원) 제도는, 종래의 사법시험(구사법시험)을 원칙적으로 폐지하고, 그때까지 존재하는 사법시험 합격 후의 사법연수를 단축화하여, 로스쿨 재학 중에 재판의 실무나 법조윤리 등 직업법조에 중요한 소양을 몸에 익히는 것으로 되었다. 그 수단의 하나로서 로스쿨에 있어서 리걸 클리닉이 중시되고 있다. 대부분의 일본의 로스쿨에 있어서 리걸 클리닉은 변호사 등 직업법조의 경험자가 이 과목을 담당하고 있다. 거의 유일한, 현직의 연구자인 교원이 변호사 등록을 하는 것이 인정되고 있는 큐슈대학에서는 오로지 연구자로서 근무해 온 교원이 변호사 등록을 하고, 실제로 변호사 업무를 행하고, 그 소속법률사무소인 변호사법인 큐슈 리걸 클리닉 법률사무소와 대학의 부속시설인 큐슈대학 리걸 클리닉 센터가 재판소 근처에 있는 빌딩 안에서 일체화하여 로스쿨 학생의 리걸 클리닉 실무도 행하고 있다. 원래, 대학에서도 강의과목으로서의 리걸 클리닉은 있다. 리걸 클리닉을 위한 실무연수의 장이 되는 변호사실무를 행하는 교원의 부담은 상당히 무겁다. 취급하는 사건은 국선형사사건이나 간단한 민사소송사건 등을 포함하여 거의 전분야에 이른다. 교원인 변호사도 자기의 전문연구분야가 아닌 종류의 사건도 취급한다. 거기에서 습득한 식견은 로스쿨에서의 강의나 연습에 있어서 적지 않은 도움이 되고 있다. 리걸 클리닉의 조직·운영체제, 수강연도, 구체적인 소재, 학생이 리걸 클리닉으로서 행할 수 있는 법률면에서의 한계 등 과제는 적지 않다. 현상에 있어서는 상당정도, 교원의 부담에 의해 절반은 볼런티어(volunteer)적으로 실시되고 있다. 특히, 리걸 클리닉으로서 생생한 소송사건에 장기적으로 종사할 기회는 학생이 사법시험의 수험을 앞에 두고 있는 것에서 많지는 않다. 특히, 학생이 참가하는 소송사건을 공익사건으로 한정하는 것도 이념적으로는 중요하지만, 공익의 해석에 의하는 것도 크고, 실제의 클리닉 활동 중에서는 의식하여 선별하는 것은 간단하지 않다. 법학교원이 임상활동으로서의 리걸 클리닉을 담당하는 것의 의미는, 거의 모든 의학부 교원이 의사로서의 자격을 취득한 다음에, 임상경험도 쌓아 의학교육에 임하고 있는 것과 마찬가지로, 향후 한층 더 중시되어야 할 논점이라고 생각할 수 있다. 그 때, 리걸 클리닉 교육과 법교육 일반, 그리고 그러한 교육을 받는 연령이나 직업에도 배려하여, 큰 테두리 속에서 임상교육으로서의 법교육의 존재방식과 그 교육담당자의 본연의 자세라는 문맥에서 검토되어야 할 과제가 많이 남아 있다고 생각된다. In 2004, Japan introduced a new law school system that, in principle, abolished the old bar examination and shortened the period of post-bar examination training. A key purpose of the law school is to provide fundamental knowledge necessary for legal practice, such as practical trial skills and a sense of legal ethics. One important mechanism for implementing this goal within the new law schools has been the creation of a legal clinic for law school students. In most law schools in Japan, legal professionals with practical experience have been responsible for the legal clinics. Kyushu University is almost unique in that teaching staff who are researchers are allowed to register as attorneys, and practice law at a specially established university affiliated legal corporation, the Kyushu University Legal Clinic Law Office, and organize the legal clinic course for law school students in the Kyushu University Legal Clinic Center in an office located close to the District and High Court building. Furthermore, the legal clinic is offered as a university course. Since the legal clinic is expected to provide practical legal training it places a heavy burden on the responsible faculty. A diverse range of cases are dealt with, ranging from court appointed criminal cases to minor civil disputes. Responsible faculty are thus expected to deal with cases and issues in areas of law that they may not have specialized knowledge. Knowledge obtained from this experience has proved to be extremely advantageous for students in other lectures and coursework in the Law School. Nevertheless, a number of significant issues have arisen in implementing the legal clinic, including issues related to organization and management structure, determining the most appropriate year for students to participate, developing appropriate and detailed materials, and determining the amount of legal work that students may engage in. Currently, the burden of the responsible faculty is considerable and, in reality, much of the work is done on a voluntary basis. In particular, opportunities for students to be involved in actual legal cases for an extended period of time are limited, since the students are obliged to prepare for, and sit, the bar examination. Ideally it might be more appropriate to limit student involvement to public interest lawsuits, however, this is dependent on our understanding of the public interest, and making this kind of distinction in a careful manner can be challenging in the context of the work of the legal clinic. The reasons why law teachers are taking responsibility for the legal clinic as a clinical activity are similar in certain aspects to the way that professors of medicine have obtained a license to practice medicine and gained clinical experience prior to teaching, and from now on this needs to be regarded as an important matter. Many issues need further consideration, in particular there needs to be a comprehensive examination of legal education and the role of legal teachers within a clinical education. In thinking about these issues particular attention needs to given to the function of the legal clinic, the appropriate form of academic legal education, and the age and background of the students.

Building International Collaboration through a Disability Law Clinic

Ding Xiangshun 인하대학교 법학연구소 2012 法學硏究 Vol.15 No.1

Legal clinical education emerged in China in 2000 with the support of the Ford Foundation. The Committee of Chinese Clinical Legal Education (CCCLE) composed seven universities instituted legal clinics was founded as a naional organization for legal clinical educators in China to promote the growth and development of clinical legal education. Renmin University is one of the founding seven law schools in China to incorporate legal clinic education and has been involved and palyed a leading role in the creation and development of legal clinic education. In 2006, Renmin Las School became the Chinese partner of the Harvard Law School Project on Disability (HPOD), and with the collaboration of the HPOD, Renmin Law School established a Center for Persons with Disabilities Law and Legal Service-China"s first public service organization that researches disability law and provides legal services specially for persons with disabilities. The Disability Law Clinic at Renmin Law School is designed to be one part of the curriculum of Comparative Law Program at the graduate level. The Renmin University Disability Law Clinic"s activities are diversified, as they include not only client representation but also the drafting of innovative legislation and policies. The main clinical activities are (1) Assisting and participating in training sessions sponsored by the HPOD at Renmin Law School (2) Developing advocacy skills and offering skills training for special groups (3) Working with government authorities to improve disability laws (4) Sponsoring regular roundtable discussions and international symposiums of issues relating to disabilities (5) Working with NGOs on a regular basis and providing legal services for them. Through these activities, the Renmin Disability Law Clinic has gained varius results and also establishes a platform to strengthen international communication and collaboration between Renmin University Law School and Harvard Law School. The clinic also advances the goals of training law students to master the domestic and international rules in the area of disability law, international communication skills, and advocacy skills for persons with disabilities. At the same time, the Renmin Disabilit Law Clinic-like other clinical programs in China-is also facing significant barriers and challenges. First, Renmin Disability Law Clinic seeks to provide diversified consulting services, but it is unable to representing clients in any litigation. Second challenge is how to integrate clinical courses with traditional curriculum. Third challenge is finding ways to interact with the international community and expand the influence of clinical work. For these things, Renmin Disability Law Clinic is looking forward to another international collaboration.

Developments and Challenges ofClinical Legal Education in Japan

Shigeo Miyagawa 인하대학교 법학연구소 2012 法學硏究 Vol.15 No.1

Japan started the law school system in April 2004 with idealistic goals such as “bridging theory and practice” and transforming the legal education “from the point of testing knowledge at the bar examination to the process of developing lawyers,” and also started clinical legal education in the same year. However, the law school system has stagnated and not functioning as originally planned as the core institution for developing lawyers. Difficulties involved in law school education can be seen in the symbolic figures of the bar examination passage rate. It also is troubled with the lack of coordination between law school education and the judicial apprenticeship. Despite the difficult situation that Japanese law schools face today, the idea and the system of clinical legal education can be said to root in Japan. That is, there are several reasons for seeing a positive prospect such as (1) secure growth of clinical courses in Japan, (2) gradual increase of law-school-affiliated law office, (3) establishment of the Japan Clinical Legal Education Association. As for improving the law school system and clinical education in Japan, there should be a re-examination of law school curricula. Since Japanese law schools are currently under severe criticism from a variety of social sectors, those who are involved in clinical legal education must re-evaluate law school curricula, meet those challenges and improve law school education. In relation to this, the JCLEA (Japan Clinical Legal Education Association) proposed to make clinical courses required electives in the model curricula of law schools. A recent report by the Carnegie Endowment for the Advancement of Higher Education also points out the necessity of integrated pedagogy for legal education. “Immigration and Refugee Law Clinic” of Waseda Law School could be a good example. In this clinic, students can learn theories of constitutional law, administrative law, civil procedural law, and international law. They can also be trained in lawyer-client communication skills with the assistance of language interpreters. They can also learn the multi-dimensional nature of the legal system. They can develop a deeper understanding of the situation of foreigners and refugees. There is another kind of problem in Japan. Because there is no student practice rule, law students cannot directly provide legal services for real clients. For solving this matter, there have been some preliminary discussions between the Japan Federation of Bar Associations and the Ministry of Justice, and they continue their work to prepare for the adoption of a Japanese version of student practice rules. As another matter, law schools in Japan need the quality control of externship education. Externship training is the most prevalent clinical method that is being used at Japanese law schools. But many law schools just send students to law offices to have them experience legal practice on the job. They also need to develop a younger generation clinical teachers. Some law-school-affiliated law offices, such as Waseda University Legal Clinic Law Office, have begun to hire novice attorneys as clinical teaching assistants. It means there is a new entry of clinical teachers. So, senior clinical teachers are very much looking forward to seeing the new generation of clinical teachers contributes to the enhancement of legal education. Lastly, it is very important to use clinical pedagogy in the total process of developing lawyers. The involvement of law schools or university based institutes in judicial apprenticeship training and continuing legal education would make legal education a genuine “process of developing lawyers” from the outset to completion.

우리나라의 법학실무교육 개선방안

길준규(Kil, Joon-Kyu) 한국토지공법학회 2010 土地公法硏究 Vol.51 No.-

우리나라는 전통적으로 대학이 법학교육을 담당하고, 실무수습은 법원이 담당하는 이원화된 체제를 유지하여 발전하여 왔다. 그러나 변호사선발인원의 확대와 법학교육의 개선을 위하여 진지한 논의없이 갑자기 미국로스쿨을 받아 들여 법학교육을 개편한 결과 교육기관인 법학전문대학원이 미국식으로 법학교육과 실무수습을 동시에 진행하는 방식으로 전환되었다. 따라서 이러한 일원화된 새로운 체제하에서 어떻게 법학교육을 할 것인지, 특히 실무수습은 어떻게 하여야 하는지, 어떠한 범위까지 하여야 하는지가 문제될 수 밖에 없다. 이를 검토하기 위하여 우선 이론과 실무가 일원화되어 모범이 되는 미국의 법학교육과 실무수습 제도에 단순한 소개가 아닌 보다 정확한 이해가 선행되어야 한다. 물론 미국도 식민지 당시 도제에 의한 변호사양성으로 실무수습이 중심이 되었으나, 이후에 로스쿨 설립에 따라 로스쿨졸업이 변호사 자격요건이 되면서 특히 랭델의 사례학습법을 통하여 법학이론교육이 강화되었다. 이후 이론교육에 대하여 이의를 가진 실무가의 요구에 의하여 다시 실무수습이 법학교육내에 편입되는 역사적 과정을 겪었고, 여전히 미국에서도 실무가는 불만이다. 현재 미국에서 시행되는 실무교육제도(Clinical Legal Education)인 모의재판(Simulation), 협의의 Legal Clinic인 내부수습(Internship)과 외부수습제도(Extenship)의 의미와 수습방법, 교육방법과 평가 등에 대하여 상세하게 검토하였다. 그리고 우리나라처럼 여전히 존재하는 미국의 실무교육과 법학교육간의 괴리와 갈등관계에 대하여서도 설명하였다. 이에 따라서 현재 우리나라 법학전문대학원 내의 실무과목의 현황과 실무교육의 범위가 어디까지 해야 할 지를 검토하였다. 특히 미국에서 시행되었던 실무교육이 대륙법계인 우리나라에서 가지는 함의에 대하여서도 평가하였고, 실무교육의 주체인 실무교수는 미국처럼 실무과목에 한정하여 강의하여야 함을 강조하였다. 그리고 현재 시행되는 법조윤 리, 법률정보의 조사, 법문서의 작성, 실무과정에 대한 개선방안을 검토하였다. 이로써 법학전문대학원 법학교육에서 실무수습이 가지는 의미를 다시 한 번 자리매김할 수 있었다. In the Republic of Korea universities have traditionally been responsible for legal education and court for legal practice in lawyering. In order to expand the number of lawyers who passed the limited Bar-exam and to improve the Legal Education the legal education system has changed similarly with American Legal Education under the Law School. Therefore new Korean Law School must educate both legal education and legal practice. It are the problems in korean university how to teach the legal practice and what contents will be taught. To evaluate and criticise this problem american legal education and legal practice including skills for lawyering as a model should be researched and reviewed before introduction. It is origin that the lawyers practice in the United States had been trained in a private law office as clerkship, or had educated themselves by a course of reading. By 1900 it was quite clear that the law school would come to dominate legal education. American legal education was been enhanced by the Langdell' methode. In the 1960s the american law schools have introduced legal clinic program for professional skills. Most lawyering skills course often take form of “simulation”, “Internship” with live client, or Externship. ABA standard now require that law school offer courses providing live-client or other real-life practice experiences und supervision of law school faculty. After the description of clinical legal education in American law schools the problem of transferability of the concept to the Korean Legal Educations System is then analysed by insight of continental law. Finally improvement of legal practice education in Korea is presented.

법률전문대학원 부설 법률상담센터의 의의와 과제

민홍석(Min Hong Seok) 인하대학교 법학연구소 2010 法學硏究 Vol.13 No.2

한국의 사법제도가 법조인력양성과 재판제도에서 큰 변화의 과정을 겪고 있으며 그 중심에 법학전문대학원이 있다. 법학전문대학원이 도입되면서 법학전문대학원의 실무교육과 관련하여 공익적 견지에서 법학전문대학원 부설 법률상담센터 및 리걸 클리닉의 사회적ㆍ교육적 역할이 강조되고 있다. 그 동안 경제적ㆍ사회적 약자를 위한 기본권보장의 차원에서 다양한 기관들로부터 법률구조사업이 진행되어 왔다. 국가 차원의 법률구조사업으로 민사소송법상 소송구조제도, 형사소송법상 국선변호제도, 법률구조법상대한법률구조공단에 의한 법률구조사업, 정부기관인 한국소비자원, 국가인권위원회 등에 의해 해당 분야별로 행해지는 법률구조업무가 있고, 민간 차원의 법률구조사업으로 한국가정법률상담소, 대한변호사협회의 법률구조재단, 기타 서울 YMCA 등이 펼치는 법률구조사업이 있다. 그러나 법학전문대학원 부설 법률상담센터는 이러한 기존의 법률구조사업과는 그 성질과 역할이 다른 새로운 형태의 법률구조와 사법패러다임을 구현하는 중심에 서 있어야 한다. 법학전문대학원 부설 법률상담센터는 기존의 법률구조사업이 미시적 개별적 구조에 치중하여 온 것과 달리, 미시적 개별적 구조에 더하여 새로운 거시적 전략적 법률구조사업을 하여야 하며, 그러한 활동을 통하여 새로운 사법 패러다임을 구성하고, 단순히 절차적 보장에만 그치는 것이 아니라 제도적으로 실질적인 법적 정의가 실현될 수 있도록 하는 법률복지가 이루어지도록 하여야 한다. 본 논문은 이러한 관점에서 먼저 법률복지의 의의에 대해서 살펴보고, 이에 따라 그동안 시행되었던 국가 및 민간 차원의 법률구조제도에 대해서 간략히 살펴본 후, 새로이 등장한 법학전문대학원 부설 법률상담센터가 이러한 기존의 법률구조기관과는 달리 어떠한 새로운 의의를 갖고 있으며, 어떠한 점에서 차별화되어야 하고, 또한 어떠한 과제를 수행하여야 하는가에 대한 비젼 및 그 운용방향을 제시하고 이로 인해 우리가 나아가야할 궁극적인 법률복지의 형태에 대한 대안을 제시하고자 한다. The Korean judicial system has been changing greatly now and law school is located in the center of that change. With the introduction of law school, the function of legal service center and legal clinic education in law school are emphasized. Lots of legal aid systems have been provided from various organizations for economically and socially poor people. But the legal aid provided from legal service center in law school should be different from the present and past legal aid. The present legal aid system focused on micro and individual legal aid and that’s the traditional method. But the new legal aid given from legal service center including legal clinic in law school should focus on macro and structural legal aid. Through those activities the law service center and legal clinic of law school should reform the paradigm of the present judicial system. Macro and structural legal aid means not only focusing on individual legal aid for poor people but also focusing on legal aid for social and structural reformation regardless of personal problems. That means substantial and true legal aid for all people. The true legal welfare is very important. The true legal welfare means justice and equality before law. We should make an effort of reforming Korean judicial system by law school and legal clinic. It’s very difficult for other legal aid organizations to do things like those. In order to achieve this purpose, the role of law service center and clinical legal education in law school cannot be too emphasized.

CLINICAL LAW PROGRAMS AT U.S. LAW SCHOOLS

라프라드 부산대학교 법학연구소 2012 법학연구 Vol.53 No.2

The purpose this article is to give an overview of some of the important features of U.S. clinical law programs as a starting point for those Korean law schools that may be considering their own clinical law programs. This is not a manual, but an outline of some of the common features and potential concerns that should be considered when starting a clinical program. Law school clinics and legal clinical education in general, provide law school students an opportunity to combine classroom study with actual practice in a real life setting. Students gain practical experience while working under the close supervision and tutelage of a law professor and/or clinical attorney who guides the student step by step. Students work with real people on real legal problems and are able to do so with limited practice authority granted by the local bar. This limited practice ability, the ability to practice law in a limited highly supervised setting, is a critical feature that makes law clinics attractive to students. Law schools in the United States frequently offer a number of clinical law programs for its participating law students, with some universities offering over thirty choices. Although there are a large variety of courses offered, there are some important features common to all clinics, including staffing, course design, enrollment restrictions, and eligibility. There is no requirement as to what specific clinical programs law schools have to offer, but there are a several types of clinics that are popular among the law schools, including child advocacy, environment, and prosecution and defense to name a few, that may be illustrative for Korean purposes. Finally, this article looks at several factors and concerns that should be addressed when considering the start-up and operation of a law clinic. For example, the clinic’s goals, available resources, and ethical safeguards have to assessed, as well as the student’s ability to practice law, the clinic’s political autonomy, and staffing concerns have to be addressed.

The Law Clinics at SNU School of Law: A Laboratory for Pedagogical Entrepreneurialism

( Stephan Sonnenberg ) 서울대학교 아시아태평양법연구소(구 서울대학교 법학연구소) 2021 Journal of Korean Law Vol.20 No.1

2021 marks ten years since Seoul National University School of Law (SNU Law) launched its law clinics. Such anniversaries present us with an occasion not only to celebrate how far we have come, but also with an opportunity to think strategically about the years ahead. This paper describes how SNU Law incrementally built and strengthened its clinical program, and how it managed within one decade to build one of Korea’s most dynamic clinical legal education (CLE) programs. SNU Law has embarked on a mission to host a diverse clinic, devoted to the promotion of a public service mindset among its students and faculty. SNU Law’s clinic is designed to make a positive social impact in the surrounding communities, and develop a uniquely Korean model of clinical legal education that other law schools in Korea can adopt and amend as they see fit. This paper also looks to the future to describe those constituencies and audiences that, in the opinion of the author, will likely prove to be the most directly relevant in the ability of the clinics to achieve this lofty vision. This paper’s contribution is not primarily the description of a concrete and finalized outcome of SNU Law’s investments into CLE. Rather, it describes the process that SNU Law―and in particular its clinical faculty―are using to refine and improve the effectiveness of the clinics. By giving its clinicians a great deal of freedom to experiment with new and innovative teaching methods, SNU Law’s clinics are well placed to continue adapting and evolving to meet the needs of those who have the greatest interest in the clinic’s success. This is a story of how to build a dynamic clinic, and an invitation to other institutions to replicate not the exact form of SNU Law’s clinic (or any other clinic model one can choose from), but rather to emulate instead the process by which successful clinical programs are designed and refined. the lives of people with disabilities in South Korea.