I Became a Law School Genius – 118



I Became a Genius Law School Student Episode 118

There are countless crossroads in life.

Some paths lead to a sparkling future but other paths lead directly to miserable failure.

Of course just because you make a mistake in your choice doesn’t mean everything ends.

You can go back down the path you took with a little more patience or you can take a side road and proceed in the right direction.

But if you’ve already gone too far.

What should a person do who was unable to admit in time that he had taken a wrong turn and was forced to walk until he hit a dead end?

“Aren’t you instructor Jang?”

Jang Hwa-eun suddenly woke up from her thoughts and raised her head.

“That one….”

“I am a reporter for the legal newspaper Nam Min-joo. “Do you remember the interview I had last time based on the mock exam provisional answers?”

This is someone I met through work. A cold professional mask was placed on Jang Hwa-eun’s face. Nam Min-joo spoke kindly to Jang Hwa-eun.

“What are you doing here?”

“…the kid sitting over there. “She is my daughter.”

“Huh really? Come to think of it I look a lot like instructor Jang! Wow your daughter is a law school student at Hankuk University. “You must be so proud.”

‘They say you look like me.’

Jang Hwa-eun’s eyes followed Han Seol’s figure in despair.

‘Is that really true?’

I once thought so. Beyond the resemblance I thought of her as my alter ego and whipped her so that she would not face the same failure as her mother.

I had no doubt that it was the best way.

So what is it that Jang Hwa-eun is seeing right now?

“Can you prepare one more thing?”

“One more thing here?”

“that is….”

What is shown on the screen are participants from both teams solving problems in the waiting room. The face of the male student whispering something to Hanseol looks familiar.

‘Park Yu-seung.’

Get notified for updates: https://discord.gg/93rmBjgP6B

This is the young man who defeated Jang Hwa-eun and scolded her saying that your methods were wrong.

‘He was a ridiculous guy.’

Don’t you get involved in other people’s family situations as you please? Wouldn’t he be provoking Jang Hwa-eun who has worked as a lecturer for decades by challenging him with law and provoking her long-standing trauma?

But what was even more absurd was his skill.

Wasn’t he clearly a novice who had only studied law for about half a year?

However Park Yoo-seung showed a one-step superiority by simply refuting Jang Hwa-eun’s answer and exposing its shallowness in detail.

‘It’s a monster.’

I couldn’t believe I was a first year student.

The moment she encountered his commentary Jang Hwa-eun felt as if she had once again encountered a wall that had tormented her so much a long time ago.

bar exam.

A gateway she never passed. It was the same wall that was felt by those who passed through it.

– Come see the legal argument competition. Then you will know what I mean.

Such a spell left by Park Yoo-seung. This was the reason Jang Hwa-eun was here now.

“Wow my head hurts.”

On the screen Hanseol was holding his head and groaning as he wrote a letter.

It was worth it.

Even for experienced instructor Jang Hwa-eun the final questions were very difficult.

‘Sign of theft and possession. Road castle. Leaving the collusion relationship. I don’t know if it’s a short case type but… these are difficult issues to quickly capture from such a thick record.’

In the first place when special criminal laws such as the Road Traffic Act and the Act on Punishment of Violent Acts etc. were introduced it was already far beyond the first grade level.

Hanseol is excellent. However it was still a bit difficult to deal with these problems skillfully.

If you follow Jang Hwa-eun’s curriculum faithfully it will somehow be possible by next summer.

In fact it was also very fast. Most students only begin to get a sense of how to handle recording problems towards the end of their second year.

The reason we can guarantee next summer is because Hanseol has excellent learning ability and has been following Jang Hwa-eun’s curriculum well.

‘I’m sure it would be so.’

Jang Hwa-eun stared blankly at the screen.

“This is… a sign occupied. Yes I think I know why you entrusted it to me.”

One page after another sweating hard.

“Park Yoo-seung will take evidence. “Let’s pick out the issues and write down the general theory in advance.”

Another page with a sigh.

Even though Hanseol was tearing out his hair he was writing properly page by page.

This was not the Hanseol that Jang Hwa-eun knew who could not take a single step forward beyond what she had learned.

She had already grown to a level that far exceeded Jang Hwa-eun’s expectations.

‘ah.’

Above all Han Seol quietly carries out all the work.

“…Hehe.”

‘I’m smiling.’

As if all of this was very enjoyable.

Join our discord and ping me to update more chapters. Discord: https://discord.gg/93rmBjgP6B

He was smiling with the face of someone who realized the fun of the process of studying taking on challenges and facing challenges.

“Just come out. “I’m going to leave all the annoying stuff to me and do all the cool stuff myself.”

That was an expression that Jang Hwa-eun did not recognize.

* * *

“The first issue is to determine whether Kim Gap-dong’s guilt is the arson of the Hyeonju building causing death or the preliminary arson of the Hyeonju building.”

This is the same conclusion I came to while talking with Hanseol.

If it is acknowledged that Kim Gap-dong left before starting the arson it would be fatal if he was not able to leave in advance and should be held responsible for the subsequent crimes as well.

And the standard was clear.

“Who was in a leading position in the collusion between Kim Gap-dong and Lee Eul-nam?”

If Kim Gap-dong was in a leading position he cannot escape responsibility for the arson simply by leaving the scene.

On the other hand if the two people were equal or if Lee Eul-nam was the leader the departure can be fully acknowledged.

“So we need to check the details of the conspiracy between the two people….”

The problem was that it was impossible to know just from what was written in the records.

Statements made by the defendants at the trial. A suspect interrogation report containing statements made in front of the police. Either way the lack of mention regarding this was too lacking.

“I guess that means you should look for it yourself.”

In any case any competent person can clearly see that the leading position in a collusion relationship is the key issue. Therefore understanding this itself becomes an object of evaluation.

Fortunately there was a hint.

[Evidence No. 11: The suspect interrogation report (defendant Kim Gap-dong) is being transmitted.]

– …So I called Lee Eul-nam on the night of our first birthday. Because of A I got sick and I couldn’t live up to my name. We exchanged lamentations and asked what we should do. When I came to my senses I realized that they had decided to set A’s house on fire.

The collusion between the two took place over a phone call.

then.

[Evidence No. 18: Bring up an old smartphone (manufactured by Company 0 owned by Lee Eul-nam randomly submitted).]

An old smartphone was held in my hand.

Company 0 is a company modeled after a famous real-life semiconductor company.

And the smartphones made by this company were equipped with a function to automatically record calls.

In the original work this was mentioned in passing during an evidence law class.

In a dispute regarding the exclusive contract of an idol group automatic recordings made on a smartphone a product of this company served as decisive evidence.

The incident itself was modeled after an incident that occurred in reality. I remember it became quite a hot topic in the comments section.

“In short… if you didn’t turn it off on purpose it’s in here.”

The details of the call will be saved.

Since this is an item that Lee Eul-nam voluntarily submitted in connection with the case there is no problem with its legality as evidence.

Open the folder containing the recording files and scroll through the screen to find the date when the crime was committed.

“I guess this is it.”

[201X.0X.0X. 21:09:14 Lee Eul-nam]

The recording matches perfectly including the date and time and even the fact that the person on the other end of the call was Lee Eul-nam. I clicked and played it.

“hmm….”

However the results were not very encouraging.

“It’s vague?”

– Hey Eulnam. I just can’t live like this.

– why. Because of the boss?

– okay. Honestly don’t you have a lot accumulated? I still remember the last time your grandfather passed away. When you said you were going to guard the mortuary that guy said something to you.

– ‘Useless bastard. Where are you going to go if you do things like this? They said ‘If a guy like you goes why don’t you stay and do the work?’

– under. Even thinking about it again makes me angry.

…(syncopation)…

– Gap-dong. Should I just set it on fire?

– What?

– At A’s house. Burn the whole thing down and kill it.

-Are you serious?

-Is there anything you can’t do?

– …There is a part of the wall of his house where the bricks on one side have become soft and hardened. If you break it down you’ll be able to get in easily.

– Looks like you’ve thought about it too.

“This should or should not be seen as proactive participation.”

In order to judge initiative several circumstances must be examined.

Who suggested the crime?

Did you make a specific crime plan or provide the necessary information?

Did you prepare and take charge of the direct means of committing the crime or a method of escape?

This issue straddles a somewhat ambiguous gray area.

First of all according to the recording of the two people it was Lee Eul-nam who suggested the crime first. Kim Gap-dong was the one who accepted his proposal.

Instead bringing up the story of the wall can be seen as providing the information necessary to plan a crime.

In reality the invasion of Kim Gap-dong and Lee Eul-nam’s shared residence was accomplished by knocking down one side of the wall.

However if you were to ask whether he was proactive enough to be able to say with certainty that was not the case.

I listened to the recording until the end but there was nothing else that could be said to indicate that Kim Gap-dong provided more detailed information or participated in planning.

“When it comes to exam questions they usually give clearer facts.”

If one wanted to draw the conclusion that the person was an accomplice who took the lead a clearer cause of death would be given.

He made a detailed crime plan researched the escape route in advance drove his own car and gave rides to other accomplices.

The opposite is also true.

He passively agreed to commit the crime and only accompanied him to the scene but he ran away right before committing the crime giving signs that he was not proactive.

But our Kim Gap-dong was neither.

It seemed like it could be made to create the logic that he was the leading accomplice and it also seemed like it could be pushed in the direction of saying that was not the case.

I’m confused.

‘no. Rather because I was confused I became more certain.’

As I have said repeatedly the outcome of the competition must be certain. This is because there should be no room for objections to be raised later.

The judgment of truth changes depending on the evidence. In light of precedent it clearly falls under a specific concept.

An ambiguous situation like this where both sides are possible should not arise.

In a real-life case the point is to argue for something that is at least a little more advantageous to oneself amidst this ambiguity but in problems prepared for competitions it must fall neatly to one side.

So there is only one conclusion that follows from this.

“This wasn’t an issue in the first place.”

Leadership in collusion is not the key issue that determines the correct answer.

There may be a separate clue hidden somewhere completely different that completely overturns the premise of the case.

“There was a clue.”

I recall the video of A’s yard captured on CCTV.

There Lee Eul-nam’s ‘both pockets’ contained pieces of wood brought for arson.

Pockets on both sides.

That means there are two.

“But there was one piece of wood that was found at the scene and seized as evidence.”

The only piece of wood listed in the evidence list was half-burned.

So where did the other one go?

“It makes sense to think that Lee Eul-nam took it back with him because he didn’t use it… but anyway we have to find the direction of that piece of wood.”

I had a strong intuition that the truth of the incident was hidden there.

So I wandered around the simulation looking for pieces of wood.

“under.”

Then finally.

“also. “It was something like this.”

I found what I was looking for and smiled in remorse.