I Became a Law School Genius

Chapter 5

『 Translator – Divinity 』

“It’s a mistake of fact regarding a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness.”

The room fell silent.

Seeing the bewildered expressions of the students, I realized that I had habitually used an abbreviation that had stuck with me from my exam preparation days.

I hurriedly shook my head and added an explanation.

“In other words, there is room to consider a ‘mistake of fact regarding a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness’.”

Only then did some students nod their heads, saying, “Ah.”

‘Mistake of fact regarding a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness’ is a concept that appears relatively early on in the general part of criminal law.

Students who diligently studied in advance would have skimmed through the first half of the general part of criminal law, so they should have at least heard of the term.

“In this case, it only states that ‘A’ saw the flyer and posted its contents on the school community; it doesn’t guarantee that the contents of the flyer are true. As student Shin Seo-joon mentioned, to apply Article 310, it requires ‘truthful facts’ and ‘public interest purpose’.”

“…Continue explaining.”

“If the flyer is true, we can apply Article 310. But can we apply it as is even if it’s false? Even if it’s not a ‘truthful fact’?”

I held the law book in my hand and flipped through the pages.

The page I needed to open wasn’t the one about defamation, the main issue of this case, but the general part much earlier in the book.

“Article 13 of the Criminal Act. Mens rea.”

At my words, the students flipped through their own law books.

“An act that is done without awareness of the facts that are elements of the crime is not punishable.”

“…So what?”

“At the beginning of this lecture, the professor said that all we have to judge is what act, under what crime, and to what extent it should be punished.”

I added,

“Modern criminal law primarily bases its standards on the ‘intention’ to commit a crime. Crimes without intention are not punished unless there is a special provision for punishing negligent crimes, and when determining ‘what’ crime a person has committed, it is based on the intention they had.”

It was a very general statement.

It’s knowledge at the level of common sense that’s written on the first page of any criminal law textbook and explicitly stated as an article in the law book.

Even if it’s been a long time since my exam preparation days, it would be embarrassing if I couldn’t even say this much.

“In this case, if the flyer is false, the act ‘A’ perceived is stating a fact that damages ‘B’s reputation… but what actually happened is the act of spreading false information and damaging ‘B’s reputation. Therefore, we must first determine whether to examine it under Article 307, Paragraph 1, defamation by stating facts, or Article 307, Paragraph 2, defamation by spreading false information.”

“Oh,” murmurs rippled through the room.

“I mentioned that our criminal law judges crimes based on awareness and intention, right? So even if the flyer is false, since A’s awareness and intention were to state facts, the provision to be examined is confirmed as Article 307, Paragraph 1. Then, the question becomes whether we can apply Article 310, a special provision for Article 307, Paragraph 1.”

I flipped through the pages to Article 310.

“As you can see, the title next to Article 310 is ‘Justification for Exclusion of Unlawfulness’. You all would have heard about justifications for exclusion of unlawfulness in some way. It means that even if there was intent for the crime and the facts constituting the crime existed, if there is a justifiable reason for such an act, it is not unlawful and therefore not punishable.”

I clearly pointed out the nature of the provision.

“A typical example is self-defense in response to an unlawful infringement. In the case of Article 310, it is a special justification for exclusion of unlawfulness that applies only to defamation, stipulating ‘statement of facts’ and ‘solely for public interest purposes’.”

I glanced around at my classmates.

The hostile glares they had been giving me were gone, replaced by a captivated focus as they held their law books and looked towards me.

All the students aiming to enter the best law school in Korea were listening only to me…

“In other words, ‘A’ believing that he was ‘stating facts’ is a mistake of assuming the existence of a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness when there is none. This can be considered a ‘mistake of fact regarding a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness’, the so-called ‘mistake of fact regarding justification’.”

“Hmm. And so?”

Jang Yong-hwan had also raised his eyebrows with interest.

Now, going in circles, I had finally arrived at the main point I had initially brought up.

Actually, up to this point, it was no different from reciting from a cheat sheet.

Shin Seo-joon had already shown me where to look.

The rest was just reading the title and requirements of the articles in the law book and adding general knowledge.

From here on, I had to pretend to know everything I could, exaggerating what I remembered and downplaying what I didn’t.

“The prevailing view in academia on cases that fall under ‘mistake of fact regarding justification’ takes the position of the ‘limited responsibility theory’. However, precedents do not follow this.”

First, I introduced the conflict between the prevailing view and the precedents.

“Instead, they consistently rule that unlawfulness is excluded if there are justifiable grounds for the mistake. Then, in this case, can we say that there are such ‘justifiable grounds’?”

I pointed my finger at the blackboard, and the students’ gazes involuntarily followed.

“‘A’ immediately posted on the community based on a flyer found on the ground, evidence whose truthfulness was uncertain.”

I emphasized the “uncertain” part.

“Considering that ‘B’ was a candidate for student council president and the election was in progress, we cannot rule out the possibility that it was black propaganda distributed by the opposing camp. Despite this, it cannot be seen as justifiable to assume the content is true without investigating it.”

I paused for a beat, then delivered the conclusion.

“Therefore, if the flyer is true, as mentioned in the previous answer, Article 310 applies, and it is not punishable. If it is false, the application of Article 310 is denied, and it is punished as defamation by stating facts.”

“…”

Actually, there are over six theories regarding ‘mistake of fact regarding a justification for exclusion of unlawfulness’.

During my bar exam preparation days, it was basic to write down the names, grounds, and conclusions of each theory, but there was no way I could remember all of that now.

So, I just mentioned the name of the majority theory, which I barely remembered because I had used it so much, and skipped over the rest as if it were common knowledge.

Then, I focused on the interpretation of the case to gloss over things.

If he were to ask me to explain the limited responsibility theory or what other perspectives exist, I wouldn’t be able to answer.

Because I’ve forgotten it all!

‘Please let this work.’

An eternity-like silence followed.

And then.

Clap, clap.

I looked up at the sound of applause.

“Excellent. Five bonus points.”

Jang Yong-hwan was clapping his hands.

‘Five points? That’s more generous than I imagined.’

Group evaluations in the pre-law program have a total score of 40 points.

The base score is 10 points, and if group members receive bonus or penalty points, they are accumulated.

To this, the first exam score is converted to 10 points, and the second exam score is converted to 50 points, for a total of 100 points for the final grade calculation.

Group evaluation scores are reflected directly, so they are valuable.

Especially compared to the first exam, the 5 points I just received were a significant gain, enough to overturn four or five multiple-choice questions.

“Was your name Park Yoo-seung?”

“Yes, Professor.”

“Impressive. Anyone can memorize legal principles.”

Jang Yong-hwan’s lips curved into a smile.

“But it’s different to find an issue that the problem doesn’t teach you based on that. It requires a lot of experience, repeated practice, and a solid understanding of the basic framework of criminal law. Or… being a natural genius.”

It was quite a mischievous question to throw at prospective students who weren’t even first-years yet.

Nodding his head in acceptance, Jang Yong-hwan asked me,

“Have you chosen your advisor yet?”

“Huh?”

“If you become interested in the prosecution, come find me.”

My jaw dropped.

That was the highest praise Jang Yong-hwan could give.

“…I’ll think about it.”

Actually, I had expected Jang Yong-hwan to be satisfied with this level of response.

In the original story, he was a practitioner who had worked as a prosecutor for decades, and as an educator, he showed the attitude that as long as one could properly present the stance and grounds of precedents, there was no need to cling to theories.

It wasn’t his style to meticulously check knowledge of each and every theory.

I took a gamble believing that, but I never knew the reaction would be this good.

I was just aiming to get 1 or 2 bonus points…

The fact that Jang Yong-hwan was the first to mention an advisor meant that he really liked my answer.

Of course, he wouldn’t force someone who didn’t have the grades to be his mentee.

Still, leaving a good impression on Jang Yong-hwan was a big achievement.

The rest of the class went smoothly.

As expected of a renowned professor, Jang Yong-hwan’s lecture was easy to understand, and he pinpointed and emphasized the important points that we needed to know.

It was such an informative time that I didn’t even notice how the two hours passed.

When the class ended and it was lunchtime,

“Wait.”

Han Seol stopped me as I was about to leave to find the cafeteria.

“…How did you know?”

“How did I know what?”

“There’s no way Park Yoo-seung would have studied the specific part of criminal law. How did you know the answer?”

Han Seol’s pupils were shaking with confusion.

It seemed like the scoundrel she knew as Park Yoo-seung and the savior who had just scored points by pointing out an issue no one else could answer were clashing within her.

“Are you really Park Yoo-seung?”

It was a startling question, but I played dumb and answered,

“The answer? I didn’t know.”

“…What?”

“As you said, how would I know the specific part? If I knew, I would have raised my hand before Shin Seo-joon answered.”

“No, but then how…”

“I just looked up the article he mentioned, and it said ‘justification for exclusion of unlawfulness,’ so I thought, wouldn’t that be a mistake of fact regarding justification? I just happened to see it while flipping through the general part during the break when I was bored.”

“That’s impossible. Park Yoo-seung read a textbook during the break because he was ‘bored’?”

Han Seol was aghast.

“I told you, I’ve decided to turn over a new leaf and start fresh. Even if I haven’t studied as hard as you guys, I’m putting in the effort.”

“…”

Han Seol’s eyes narrowed.

She seemed to be contemplating whether to believe my words.

But she would eventually be convinced.

She would never accept the conclusion that ‘Park Yoo-seung solved a specific part of criminal law problem and even got the hidden issue right!’ even if the world turned upside down.

But it was much more plausible that I had luckily contributed to a problem Shin Seo-joon had already solved.

Actually, that was closer to the truth.

“…Fine.”

Han Seol soon nodded.

“I still can’t completely trust you, but it’s true that you were a big help this time. I didn’t know anything about that problem, and you even got one over that lanky guy… so I’ll say thank you.”

“Why are you thanking me? I did it for my own score.”

“Just take the compliment.”

Han Seol chuckled.

“But next time, tell me before you do anything. I was so nervous because I didn’t know what you were going to do.”

“Yes, yes.”

I waved my hand dismissively and sent Han Seol away.

I had wasted more time than I thought.

I was hungry. Let’s eat, let’s eat.

***

“In the Law School” was also known for its unnecessarily well-drawn food.

I still remember the day a large oven gratin with a whole chicken leg appeared.

Even though it was just a drawing, I couldn’t help but salivate at the combination of the crispy baked chicken leg and the melted cheese.

Perhaps because I saw it while eating instant noodles alone in a dark office, the scene was strongly etched in my mind.

In the comments section, the comment “If I were to fall into the world of ‘In the Law School’, I would definitely try that gratin” received a lot of likes and was chosen as the top comment, so I wouldn’t have been the only one who felt that way.

And now.

The chance to fulfill their wish on their behalf had come to me.

[Cooking complete: 397, 398, 401]

In my hand was a number tag printed with the number 401.

I hurried to get my food and found a secluded spot in the student cafeteria.

The menu was, of course, the oven-baked chicken gratin I saw in the original story.

Trying to calm my excited heart, I pierced the chicken leg with a fork.

The feeling of the crispy skin shattering against the fork was fantastic in itself.

Unable to resist any longer, I tore off a large piece and stuffed it into my mouth with the cheese.

“Delicious…”

It was an emotional taste.

Especially since I had lived a life with no connection to gastronomy, the feeling was even greater.

This juicy meat! This soft cheese! Being able to study law already felt like a dream, but could I be this happy?

No, this won’t do.

It’s unacceptable to waste even a moment of this blessed life being lazy.

Savoring the taste of the meat in my mouth, I took out “Principles of Civil Law” from my bag and spread it out on the table.

One bite, one line of the book…

It was during this enjoyable mealtime,

“Do you mind if I join you?”

For a moment, I thought I had misheard.

There couldn’t be a crazy person in Hankuk University who would ask Park Yoo-seung to eat together, right?

Puzzled, I lifted my head, which had been buried in the gratin.

Across from me,

“I have something to talk about,”

Shin Seo-joon, the protagonist of the original story, was smiling and looking at me.