[Contribution] Purpose of introduction: The outdated law school and legal training system must be completely reformed

At one time, the bar exam was a representative ‘admission gate’ in our society. This is because, without any special background, he was able to enter the legal profession based solely on his skills. This system was not perfect, but at least there was a time when it made the saying, “A dragon breeds in a stream” a reality.

It has already been 17 years since the law school (law school) system was introduced. At the time, this system was launched with the goal of resolving the problem of ‘failure to pass the civil service examination’ and training legal professionals with practical skills and diversity. The author is also one of those who positively evaluated the abolition of the bar exam. This is because there was a clear awareness of the problems with the unrealistic test environment and inefficient talent selection methods, and the need for system reform was also keenly felt.

However, as time passes, a deep gap is widening between the ideals of the system and reality. On the surface, law school appears to be a system open to anyone, but in reality, the starting line is different. As of 2025, more than 80% of accepted students at 22 of the 25 law schools nationwide are from universities in the metropolitan area, and more than half are from so-called SKY universities. Only 5% of students graduated from local universities. This is where the gap between formal openness and actual entry barriers is clearly revealed.

Furthermore, law schools are gradually losing their original purpose of ‘cultivating professional lawyers with diverse backgrounds and experiences.’ Education is gradually degenerating into an ‘academy-type structure’ aimed only at passing the bar exam, and practice-oriented or convergence-type education has virtually been pushed to the back burner. Some students are attempting to transfer to law schools in the metropolitan area or taking repeated leave of absence to increase their passing rates, and the number of cases of preparing for the exam at private academies is also increasing. As a result, the law school system is increasingly becoming more and more ‘notified’, and is actually returning to a structure that repeats the ills of the past bar exam.

These institutional distortions, coupled with the structural limitations of the legal market, create bigger problems. The legal market is unable to expand, and as the number of legal professionals with uniform backgrounds and ways of thinking increases, a closed structure in which they compete for limited opportunities is becoming entrenched. This not only hinders the diversity and creativity of the legal profession, but also has a negative impact on the quality and accessibility of legal services provided to the public.

Of course, we cannot say that the bar exam was an ideal system. Long-term exams and excessive competition have caused many social and personal side effects. However, the bar exam was an open structure in which anyone could take the challenge, and it also opened the door to certain opportunities for those from non-metropolitan areas or from non-literary universities. If the current law school system is not able to replace even that, discussing again the revival of the bar exam or the full expansion of the preliminary exam is a plan worth considering.

However, in the end, what is important is not the superiority or inferiority between systems. The question that really needs to be asked is this. “Is the current system actually open to talented young people?” The system should not be an end in itself, but a means to protect the values ​​and ideals it was intended to realize. Law school is no exception.

Now that the presidential election has begun, if the political world talks about youth, fairness, and the restoration of class mobility, the legal training system must also be discussed in a public forum beyond political factions. This is not just a matter of fighting over the existence of the examination system, but a fundamental question of how far Korean society can actually guarantee equality of opportunity.

I hope that the promise of change starting from the legal profession will once again give hope to more people that “dragons can fly from streams.”

[View full article]
Law Leader - [Contribution] Purpose of introduction Fading law school, legal training system needs to be completely revamped (link)
Korea Law Daily - [Contribution] Purpose of introduction Fading law school, legal training system needs to be completely revamped (link)