Korea's experimentation in legal services market liberalization: lessons learned and options for reform

Abstract

Korea amended the Foreign Legal Consultant Act in 2016 to fulfil its free trade agreement commitments to Phase 3 legal services market liberalization. This Phase 3 liberalization allowed foreign law firms to form Joint Venture Law Firms with Korean law firms and practice in certain areas of local laws by employing Korean-licensed lawyers. However, free trade agreement contracting parties heavily criticized the terms and conditions of Joint Venture Law Firms and argued that these would discourage foreign law firms from entering joint ventures, thus significantly undermining the effect of Phase 3 liberalization. Indeed, the Joint Venture Law Firm provisions have not been used, even after five years since Phase 3 liberalization. With this backdrop, this article examines: (1) Korea's history and past struggles to implement the Foreign Legal Consultant Act; (2) Criticisms of the Act and their legal validity; and (3) The costs and benefits of policy options for Korea's future legal services market liberalization. This analysis provides a foundation for discussing future regulatory reforms of the Foreign Legal Consultant Act.