In January, the Korean Bar Association submitted its first evaluation among 25 newly formed law schools in Korea and gave a warning to Korea University Law School (KULS) for exceeding the time limit for lecturers. However, KULS as-sociates submitted a refuting report on the same day, declaring that the criteria for evaluating law schools in Korea were unjust.

KULS proved itself as one of the top law schools in Korea by excelling in eight detailed categories but received a warning for professors exceeding the standard average of lecture hours. The law schools in Korea were evaluated by their performances from 2009 to 2011 and in diverse categories that included admissions, research opportunities and education facilities. KULS deputy dean Professor Ahn Hyo Jil (Law) said, “In the official evaluation category that every law school received, it clearly states that the time limit for lectures will be done yearly not by semesters. When it is written on the official guideline, the Korean Bar Association must follow the guideline rather than interpreting the guideline with their own standards.”

Although there is not a substan-tial damage to KULS, the warning re-ceived by the Korean Bar Association did negatively affect the reputation of Korea University (KU). It became one of the seven law schools in Korea that received warnings and has become one of the schools that need to receive ap-proval by the committee within a year.

According to Professor Ahn, KULS is not going to give up fighting against the outcome that put the reputation of KULS down. “If necessary, we are planning to sue the Korean Bar Associa-tion. We have scored ‘excellent’ in eight areas, which makes KULS the top law school in Korea. It would be a shame if we just let this go.” Nevertheless, since the Korean Bar Association has barely shown any will to reconsider the out-come, how the case will develop is be-ing watched with keen interest.