Constitutional Court Rules "Restrictions on Bar Exam Eligibility Are Constitutional"

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] Graduates of law schools (Juris Doctor programs) filed a constitutional complaint arguing that the Lawyer Examination Act, which limits the period and number of attempts for taking the bar exam, is unconstitutional. However, the Constitutional Court did not accept their claim.

On the 24th, the Constitutional Court unanimously ruled constitutional in the case where Mr. A and others filed a constitutional complaint claiming that Article 7 of the Lawyer Examination Act is unconstitutional.

Article 7, Paragraph 1 of the Lawyer Examination Act stipulates that the bar exam can only be taken up to five times within five years from the end of the month in which the candidate obtains a master's degree from a law school. Paragraph 2 of the same article only exempts the period of mandatory military service from the examination period limit.

Previously, the petitioners, law school graduates who became ineligible to take the bar exam after failing five times, filed a constitutional complaint in July 2018, arguing that the provision limiting the eligibility to take the bar exam to five times within five years after graduation infringes on their freedom to choose their occupation. They also raised issues with the Lawyer Examination Act only recognizing mandatory military service as an exception to the examination period limit.

On this day, the Constitutional Court stated, "The legislative purpose of this provision, which is to prevent waste of human resources caused by unlimited attempts at the bar exam, the decline in pass rates due to the accumulation of examinees, and the loss of the professional educational effect of law schools, is legitimate," and added, "Limiting the opportunity for examinees to prove their qualifications and abilities to five times within five years is an appropriate means within the scope of legislative discretion to achieve such a purpose."

The petitioners argued that, unlike when the Lawyer Examination Act was legislated, the number of failures has sharply increased, and thus a ruling of unconstitutionality should be made. However, the Constitutional Court rejected their argument, stating, "The petitioners' claims regarding the number of bar exam passers and pass rates were already considered at the time of the Constitutional Court's previous ruling, and the cumulative pass rate of bar exam takers compared to law school entrants after that ruling does not appear to fall outside the scope of the previous ruling's predictions."

The Constitutional Court has now made rulings on two constitutional complaints regarding the Lawyer Examination Act's attempt limits. In September 2016, it also ruled constitutional with a unanimous decision by all nine justices, and in the second substantive judgment in March 2018, it again ruled constitutional.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.