I Became a Law School Genius

Chapter 30
『 Translator – Divinity 』

It’s rare for an ordinary reporter to become nationally famous, known even to those outside the profession.

But the drug club case had caused a nationwide uproar, and Kim Seung-pil was hailed as a hero who single-handedly fought against injustice.

Not only was the content of his reporting impactful, but Kim Seung-pil was also an exceptional writer.

Each sentence of his articles struck the hearts of readers, evoking immense anger and empathy.

With his skills, he could make even someone who simply cut in line at a restaurant seem like the worst villain… or so it was described through narration in the original story.

Even now, after taking a leave of absence, there were still many who remembered Kim Seung-pil’s name.

It seemed the nursing home director was one of them.

I had thought about showing him a compilation of articles about Kim Seung-pil’s achievements if he didn’t recognize the name, but it was fortunate that I could skip that troublesome step.

The nursing home director’s face turned pale.

“P-please, just let it slide this once.”

The director, abandoning all pretense, abruptly knelt on the floor.

“Let it slide? You know who I am, don’t you? The public has praised me as a true reporter who pursues justice, how can I just overlook such an unsavory incident?”

‘Look at this guy.’

When he was talking to me, he seemed reluctant about that nickname, as if it wasn’t true, but when it was necessary, he used it better than anyone else.

He was incredibly thick-faced.

Perhaps it was this aspect of him that allowed him to succeed as a reporter.

“Compensation! I’ll compensate!”

The desperate director shouted.

“I’ll compensate as you demand, so please, just don’t write the article…!”

“It will be a considerable amount,”

I interjected.

“In the case of torts that cause physical injury, the scope of compensation isn’t limited to medical expenses. You also have to separately compensate for mental anguish, and if the victim is employed, you have to compensate for lost income during the period they couldn’t work due to the injury.”

Oh Gi-tae’s father worked as a sanitation worker.

He had originally planned to return to work after recovering from the surgery, but that became impossible due to the fall.

“Let’s see… If I calculate it, it’ll be like this.”

I presented the estimate I had prepared beforehand to the nursing home director.

He let out a grunt as if frustrated, but perhaps because he saw Kim Seung-pil, he meekly accepted the document.

“Is it possible to reduce the amount a little?”

“Tsk.”

“I guess not! Alright, alright, don’t make that face!”

It was a classic case of the fox exploiting the tiger’s might.

But unlike the fox who borrowed the tiger’s authority without permission, I had made a proper deal to borrow his face, so I had a right to speak.

In the end, after receiving a written pledge from the director to pay the compensation, we left the nursing home.

Mr. Oh Gi-tae was still in a daze, repeatedly expressing his gratitude.

“I-I never thought it would work out like this… Thank you both so much! How can I repay you…”

“The Legal Clinic is a volunteer activity. We can’t receive payment as students who don’t even have a license yet.”

Accepting anything would be a violation of school regulations.

After persuading Oh Gi-tae, who kept offering this and that with a regretful look, we returned to school with Kim Seung-pil.

‘Hmm, good.’

The outcome was good.

Of course, I couldn’t write in the activity report that I brought Kim Seung-pil along and threatened the director, but I could mention that I led the settlement based on the testimony of the actual perpetrator.

The Legal Clinic’s performance score is a qualitative evaluation.

The more complex the case, and the better the client’s requests are met, the better the evaluation.

If it were divided into upper, middle, and lower grades, the score for this case would undoubtedly be the highest.

Moreover, students with good performance in the first semester get priority in the distribution of consultation cases in the Legal Clinic next semester.

Aside from the difficulty of the case, it meant that I could definitely avoid cases that touched on the core storylines of the original work.

In that sense, accurately identifying the blind spot of the first case and leading to a beautiful conclusion with a settlement was a very encouraging achievement.

I hadn’t even lost anything.

“I ended up using one.”

I said to Kim Seung-pil on the way back.

“Yes? What do you mean?”

“You said you would lend me the power of the media three times. Now there are only two left.”

“Haha, what are you talking about?”

Kim Seung-pil waved his hand as if it were absurd.

“I didn’t even publish an actual article, I just went there and showed my face. That’s not considered using the power of the media. If anything, I used my own power.”

“…So you mean?”

“This case doesn’t count.”

In other words, he helped out of pure goodwill.

‘My man…!’

To be honest, it was quite a difficult decision to use up one of my precious chances.

Still, since I had already stepped into the Legal Clinic, I decided to make a sacrifice to safely achieve results.

But now that the other party said he wouldn’t count it, it was like I had gained something for free.

‘Of course, it can’t be literally free.’

If I just took and didn’t give anything back, it would eventually backfire.

Even if it was a favor, there had to be reciprocity.

This was a kind of debt I would have to repay sometime in the future.

Let’s think about that later.

***

Time flew by quickly.

The Constitutional Law study group soon fulfilled its purpose.

We each explained the summaries we had read to each other and had a brief Q&A session.

There’s no better way to remember something than by asking and answering questions about it.

Now, the knowledge from the two summaries that were my responsibility was firmly embedded in my mind, and I had a general understanding of the remaining ten.

Of course, it wasn’t a deep understanding that could match ConLaw’s academic depth.

But that was fine. As a student, all I needed to know was enough to write on the exam paper.

“It’s all thanks to you.”

“…I know.”

Even Lee Ha-ru’s dull eyes were now sparkling.

For her, who had been running away from something after a certain ‘failure’, it must have been a long time since she felt needed and had her usefulness recognized.

I hoped that this contribution would be a small turning point for Lee Ha-ru.

On the other hand, preparing for the Constitutional Law exam wasn’t the only thing I had to do.

The reason I decided to minimize my efforts in Constitutional Law was, of course, to save time to tackle the vast amounts of Civil Law and Criminal Law.

I had already laid the foundation for Civil Law and Criminal Law through single-book learning and repetitive review.

But midterms weren’t something that could be solved with just that.

‘Because the scope is limited.’

National exams like the bar exam are basically comprehensive exams.

Civil Law, Civil Procedure, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, and even elective subjects. Even if you only used one textbook per subject, you could build a tower of paper on your desk.

Therefore, it was important to have a broad understanding of the wide range of topics.

As a specific methodology for that, I chose single-book learning focused on frequently tested issues.

On the other hand, midterms cover a relatively smaller amount of content ‘in comparison’.

For example, the scope of the Civil Law I midterm exam was from the principle of good faith to apparent authority.

It wouldn’t even be half of the entire Civil Law.

‘Of course, even that alone would be over a hundred pages in the textbook.’

This was Hankuk University Law School.

A place where the most talented individuals in this world gathered and competed.

For those who were masters of studying and exams, that amount was easily digestible.

Then, there were only two ways to ensure differentiation.

Either dig a lot of traps and increase the difficulty of the questions themselves, or include even the most trivial details in the grading criteria, forcing them to cram ‘everything’ into their heads.

The method chosen by the Hankuk University Law School professors was, naturally,

‘Both.’

They had to desperately memorize the text without missing a single letter and internalize the methods of applying it.

It wasn’t the time to boast about exam experience or problem-solving skills.

Absolute time investment was necessary.

“Sigh…”

At four in the morning, my sigh softly echoed in the empty reading room.

I had been glued to my desk since 9 AM yesterday, except for class time.

My eyes were blurry, and my head felt heavy, as if it would split open.

“I feel like I’ve returned to my past life.”

The day my body finally gave out.

Even then, I was at the company until 4 or 5 AM, working.

In terms of lifestyle patterns, it was similar to that time.

Of course, it couldn’t be compared to that time.

Because repeating meaningless labor to pay off debt and studying a subject you love for your dream are fundamentally different.

[Example 23. Time of Acquisition of Contributed Property in a Foundation]

“…Let’s just solve this one and go.”

I was planning to come back to the reading room at nine o’clock today anyway.

Since it was a frequently tested issue that was ingrained in my head, let’s solve it lightly as a finishing touch and pack up.

[I. Problem]

‘Time of Acquisition of Contributed Property in a Foundation’ isn’t that difficult of an issue.

It gets complicated if you delve deeper, but simply put, the core is that two articles, Article 48 and Article 186 of the Civil Act, seem to contradict each other in certain situations.

First, accurately describe this situation in the introduction.

[Looking at Article 186 of the Civil Act, it adopts the constitutive requirement theory regarding the effect of changes in property rights, but unlike this, Article 48…]

Next, introduce the conflicting academic views on the problematic situation, point out the precedent’s stance, and then appropriately follow the precedent to give a conclusion.

“…Or so you would normally think.”

Of course, for a bar exam answer, that alone would be enough.

But what I was doing now was preparing for the midterms.

Any decent Hankuk University law student could write that much.

It was only natural that an ordinary answer wouldn’t even get me an average score, let alone first place.

“I need to differentiate myself.”

It wasn’t that difficult.

[II. Academic Opinions]

[The prevailing view, which prioritizes Article 48 of the Civil Act, considers this provision to fall under ‘other legal provisions’ of Article 187 of the Civil Act, thus not requiring registration…]

I added a plausible argument beforehand as a build-up.

[III. Precedent]

[The precedent adopts the so-called ‘relative ownership acquisition theory’…]

I clearly presented the precedent’s stance to show that I understood it well, and then,

[IV. Review and Conclusion]

[In my opinion, ownership is an absolute right, and the precedent’s creation of the concept of relative acquisition goes against the principle of statutory interpretation of property law, a fundamental principle of our property law… (omitted)… Therefore, the prevailing view based on Article 187 of the Civil Act is the most reasonable. According to this…]

I criticized the precedent’s stance based on another core principle of Civil Law and supported the prevailing view.

This would probably be the conclusion that would get the highest score.

As far as I knew, Professor Park Soo-geun, who taught Civil Law I, also supported the prevailing view that prioritized Article 48.

“Should I thank ConLaw for this?”

Although not as extreme as ConLaw, most law professors have their own views on important issues.

Among them, there are many who publish papers on related topics, whether to maintain their qualifications as professors or out of genuine academic interest.

Naturally, an answer that supports the professor’s view and presents the reasoning they consider rational leaves a good impression.

Since a human is grading the subjective answer, there’s no way it wouldn’t have an effect.

It was a great gain to have the idea of focusing on the ‘examiner’, or the ‘grader’, while preparing for ConLaw’s exam.

In national exams, you don’t know who the grader will be, but in a school midterm, the target is publicly known.

I closed the book with satisfaction and returned to my studio apartment, falling asleep with anticipation for tomorrow.

And the next day,

“How! How can no one!”

I had briefly dozed off during class due to lack of sleep, and when I opened my eyes, ConLaw was exclaiming in a hoarse voice.

“In this place, the best legal education institution in Korea! No one can explain Schmitt’s theory of sovereign dictatorship?!”

…Wait.

That’s the paper I analyzed.