변호사법 제109조 위반죄의 해석과 정책 -법무사법 개정의 필요성을 중심으로-

Abstract

In the current legal system of the legal service industry, the Attorney-at-law Act and the law on individual professional qualifications including Certified Judicial Scriveners Act should be regarded as the relation between the principle general law and exceptional special law. In order to resolve conflicts between Attorney-at-law and Beommusa Lawyer and to ensure work of Beommusa Lawyer and other qualified professionals, Attorney-at-law should not perform the work of Beommusa Lawyer and other qualified professionals. And the scope of work of Attorney-at-law based on Article 109 of the Attorney-at-law Act should narrowly interpreted. If the interpretative controversy over the scope of the Attorneyat- law''s work remains unchanged, it will be necessary to revise the relevant laws to clarify the scope of the work so as to ensure that the work of the legal professional is guaranteed. Especially it is necessary to revise Certified Judical Scriveners Act, which enlarges and clarifies the scope of Beommusa Lawyer who is a “virtually Attorney-at-law”, as in the judgment of the court of appeal, which punishes a Beommusa Lawyer who effectively handled personal individual rehabilitation case as a violation of Article 109 of the Attorney-at-law Act.