정책형성과정의 복잡성과 의제지속성 : 법학전문대학원 사례를 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study is on the explanation of the legislative proceedings for the introduction of the law school policy, using the complexity theory.
The present legal profession training system is composed of the undergraduate legal education and the bar exam. Its substitution for law school system had been debated over three administrations from 1995 to 2007.7. Analyzing the substitution process with the complexity theory, this study explains the process as a 'self-organization' of an open system.
The complexity theory tries to explain natural phenomenon and complexity, chaos, disorder, non-equilibrium, non-linearity, and holism of social, economic reality with a perspective of a maintenance of system and an establishment of order. These phenomena are considered as 'complex systems' and are explained using their, characteristics such as self-organization, path-dependency, sensitivity on the initial condition, co-evolution and emergence.
At a glance, the complex systems seem to change abruptly through chaos and disorder. However, they are stabilized by the making of an order (self-organization), followed by an emergence, in its own way. Since the stabilization of a complex system is formed from the bottom up by external negotiation and internal interaction processes, the stability of the complex system would be high.
Although researches so far have emphasized the non-deterministicity and non-linearity of the complex system, this study paid its attention on its implicit stability.
The first chapter is an introduction. The research topics of this paper are presented in this chapter. The research topics are: First, why didn't the introduction of law school policy change although the three administrations had different ideological aims? Second, what maintained the stability of the policy during legislative proceedings, which seem to be very complex and disordered? Third, which conditions maintain or weaken the stability of the policy? Answers to these questions will propose the condition for stably pursuing a policy.
The second chapter is an explanation about the previous studies and theoretical background related with this research. The section on the previous studies presents researches on law school and previous studies using complexity theory. The section on the theoretical background presents a theory on the policy formation and main contents of the complexity theory.
The third chapter is an analysis of the time that law school policy was selected as an agenda.
The policy for the introduction of a law school was discussed in order to prepare for an open legal market and to offer better legal service to the public. To fulfill these goals, many lawyers with diverse specialties must be supplied. The supporters of the law school policy, including law professors, insist that these goals may be achieved by reformation of the current legal system, with an establishment of the law school. On the other hand, of the current lawyers, who have passed the bar exams in the current system, opposed this policy because the production of a large number of lawyers with diverse specialties from law schools may infringe their vested rights.
During the administration of President Kim Young-Sam, the 'Globalization strategy committee' had proposed the introduction of the law school to the President in order to make it an agenda, but it failed due to oppositions of the legal circles, including the Supreme Court. Instead, they have proposed a gradual increase in the number of successful applicants of the current bar exam.
During the administration of President Kim Dae-Jung, the 'New education community committee' tried to select the introduction of the law school as an agenda, with a perspective of the improvement of the higher education system. However, the advisory committee for judicial reform opposed this idea by suggesting a graduateeducation of the successful applicants of the current bar exam.
These were the periods of debate between the executive branch and the judicial branch on the selection of the introduction of the law school as an agenda.
The fourth chapter analyzes the process of selecting the introduction of the lawas an agenda during administration of President Roh Moo-hyun. It became an agenda because the Supreme Court changed position and supported it. The change of Supreme Court's attitude on the introduction of the law school reflects that it was in favor of the public opinion. The administration of President Roh Moo-hyun pushed ahead with the legalization of the law school policy and the policy formation entered its second stage.
The fifth chapter is an analysis of the policy formation by the legislative process in the National Assembly. After the legislative bill on introduction of the law school has been submitted to the National Assembly, there has been one year and nine months of unstable period due to political conditions, being connected to amendment of the laws on private schools.
The sixth chapter is an analysis on the complexity which makes the formation of law school policy difficult. The order of priority among the policies and especially, President's will to decide a policy differed among the administrations. The opposition of the establishment, including the Supreme Court and the groups of lawyers who have been recognized as an expert by passing the current bar exam, has been the main cause of the complexity. On the other hand, the justification for producing lots of lawyers with specialty and diversity, in order to offer better legal service to the public and prepare for opening and globalization of the legal market, has been the main cause of the stability. In addition, active development of reasoning by the law professors and experts, and the friendly coverage by the media have been another causes for the stability.
It has taken twelve years to persuade the establishments by accepting present legal profession training system in the law school concept. After legalization has succeeded, the policies, such as those related to the law school education system and the number of successful applicants of the bar exam, have been continuously evolving. This shows that an incrementalism is valid forsolving complexity and uncertainty and securing stability of the policy.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론 1
• 제1절 문제의 제기와 연구 목적 1
• 1. 문제의 제기 1
• 2. 연구 목적 및 연구 질문 3
• 제2절 연구 대상 및 연구 방법 6
• 제2장 선행연구의 검토와 이론적 배경 8
• 제1절 선행연구의 검토 8
• 1. 법학전문대학원 정책에 관한 선행연구의 검토 8
• 2. 복잡계 이론에 의한 선행연구의 검토 10
• 제2절 정책의제형성의 개념과 복잡성 12
• 1. 정책의 개념 12
• 2. 정책의제의 설정(agenda setting)의 개념과 복잡성 14
• 3. 정책결정과정 20
• 제3절 정책형성과정의 복잡성과 의제지속성 분석을 위한 이론의 검토 23
• 1. 복잡계(complex systems)의 개념적 정의 25
• 2. 복잡계의 주요 특성 27
• 3. 복잡계 이론의 연구동향 36
• 제3장 법학전문대학원 도입논의기의 복잡성과 안정성 40
• 제1절 법학전문대학원 의제 도입 개관 40
• 1. 사법개혁의 필요성 제기 40
• 2. 법조인 양성제도의 문제점과 법학전문대학원 도입의 필요성 인식 49
• 제2절 김영삼정부의 법학전문대학원 의제설정과 무산(1980년대 중반~1996년) 50
• 1. 정부차원의 법학전문대학원 의제설정과 갈등의 발생 53
• 2. 정부차원의 강력한 추진으로 인한 변화가능성의 확대 56
• 3. 대법원 반대로 인한 법학전문대학원 의제설정 무산 60
• 제3절 김대중정부의 법학전문대학원 의제 재설정과 무산(1998년~2000년) 64
• 1. 정권교체에 따른 의제의 설정 시도 64
• 2. 정부기관 간 의견불일치로 인한 정책의제설정 실패(1999년~2000년) 68
• 제4절 법학전문대학원 의제설정기의 복잡성과 안정성 분석 72
• 1. 정책의 복잡성을 증진시킨 조건들 73
• 2. 정책의제의 지속성을 조성하는 조건들 79
• 제4장 법학전문대학원 도입합의기의 복잡성과 안정성 84
• 제1절 법학전문대학원 의제설정을 둘러싼 정책 환경 84
• 1. 의제설정 압력환경 84
• 2. 의제설정 추진 기구 작동 85
• 제2절 법학전문대학원 의제설정에 따른 갈등양상(2003.10 ~ 2004.12) 87
• 1. 대법원의 의제설정 주도 87
• 2. 의제설정에 따른 갈등 증폭 89
• 제3절 법학전문대학원 의제설정을 위한 추진기구의 설치 이후
• 갈등상황과 법안 제출 (2005.1 ~ 2006.12) 92
• 1. 의제설정을 위한 추진기구 구성 92
• 2. 의제설정에 따른 이익 갈등 노출 93
• 3. 정책의제 입법추진과정에서 사개추위의 조정 기능 103
• 제4절 법학전문대학원 도입합의기의 복잡성과 안정성 105
• 1. 도입합의기에 복잡성을 증진시킨 조건들 105
• 2. 도입합의기에 의제지속성을 증진시킨 조건들 108
• 제5장 법학전문대학원 입법추진기의 복잡성과 안정성 113
• 제1절 국회 상임위원회에서의 정책형성과정 : 상임위 회부 및 심사 114
• 1. 「법학전문대학원 설치·운영에 관한 법률안」의 상정 및 대체토론 114
• 2. 공청회 과정에서의 찬반논쟁 123
• 3. 법안심사소위원회 심사과정 128
• 제2절 법학전문대학원법안 본회의 통과 149
• 1. 법안심사소위원회 이후 법학전문대학원법안 처리지연 관련 정치상황 149
• 2. 법학전문대학원 법안 수정안의 본회의 통과 과정 153
• 제3절 법학전문대학원 입법추진기의 복잡성과 안정성 155
• 1. 입법추진기의 복잡성 156
• 2. 입법추진기의 의제지속성을 증진시키는 조건들 160
• 제6장 연구의 결론 및 함축 166
• 제1절 연구의 결론 166
• 제2절 함 축 174
• <참 고 문 헌> 181
• Abstract 187