법적 창의성, 그리고 법학교육 (Education for the Creative Lawyer)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 민주주의법학연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 민주법학 / 42호 / 165 ~ 199페이지
· 저자명 : 이재승

초록

국내에 법학전문대학원 체제가 도입된 이래로 법학 교육의 방향이나 그 방법에 대하여 많은 논의가 펼쳐지고 있다. 필자는 이 시론에서 창의적 법률가상은 어떤 것인지, 창의적 법사고를 배양하기 위한 방법은 무엇인지 검토하였다. 창의성은 미해결의 문제에 대하여 적절한 해법을 제공하는 지적 특성이다. 새로운 창의적 법학교육은 교육환경의 전반적인 개선과 함께 권위적인 교리문답이나 형식적 법논증을 탈피하고 문제의 근원들을 자유롭게 드러내고, 인접학문이나 현장의 다양한 시각들을 수용하여 문제 상황에 응용하는 작업을 포함해야 한다. 또한 법률가의 역할을 대립적 소송구도에서의 검투사로 고정시키지 말고, 오히려 문제해결자 또는 정책결정자로서의 역할을 하도록 연습시키는 것도 필요하다. 끝으로 법적 창의성은 사회적 대의에 연루되었을 때 최선의 상태에 이르기 때문에 창의성 교육과 윤리교육을 결합시켜야 한다는 점을 강조하였다.

영어초록

A lot of academic conferences on legal education have taken place after the law school system had been adopted in Korea. There has been the commonly held view that creativity is neither possible in the sphere of law, nor teachable in the law classroom. This paper attempts to refute the common opinion, give a definition of legal creativity, and introduce the various skills for creative legal education.
According to Montesquieu’s model, the legislator is the only norm creator and the interpreting judge functions as a mouth to pronounce the law. Meanwhile, it has been taken for granted that, with regard to legal creativity, there is no essential difference between legislator and interpreter, although the legislator undoubtedly has the higher altitude of discretion than the judge. Every decision-maker needs to use big or small creativity, depending on the circumstances of the pending case.
Cole analyzes at the meta-level the history of the doctrine of the American free speech libertarianism with reference to Harold Bloom’s creative misleading of a novice poet to escape from the influence of an master poet. It should not be overlooked that the judge’s anxiety is quite different from the poet’s, because to be an imitator means the end of an author only to a poet, but not to a judge. Judge’s choice is to demonstrate one’s own creative greatness or to comfortably adhere to the tradition of legal precedents.
Legal creativity is defined as the quality to provide an appropriate solution to the legally open questions. Creativity teaching is a cooperative process for the students to be conscious of their capabilities and to develop them way of the different creativity techniques. The law classroom should be changed into a place for free communication instead of authoritarian questioning offensive, the Socratic method in the pejorative meaning. The law curriculum and student’s performance evaluation system should be also redesigned with a view to developing professor’s and student’s creativity. Creativity education should include or be linked to humanities and legal ethics, because the legal creativity has been developed in the highest for social commitment.

참고자료

· 없음