Any FLC (US JD) experience at Kim & Chang? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

Not sure how this person actually clerked at K&C and have this much misinformation. I want to point out a few things. I clerked at K&C during law school.

1. Most of the FLC at K&C are not from T6 + Penn. I would say 50% are from T14 and the rest from T50 or so.

2. No one makes partner at K&C. K&C is basically corporation/llc (or its Korean equivalent) that is owned by one person. No one has the title "Partner" at K&C, look it up. Also, Korean regulation has nothing to do with the title "Partner". It's just a title and it can be given to FLCs in Korea (and they are) if a firm in Korea chooses to do so.

3. Given the above, it can be somewhat difficult to distinguish between associates and partners (they are not technically partners in the sense of having equity ownership and title but their function is virtually identical to that of a partner at a traditional firm) at K&C. Check out the website, and you will quickly see that some are much more older/experienced than others, these people are "partners" at K&C.

4. From my experience, FLCs at K&C function separately from their Korean attorney colleagues most of the time. They counsel local Korean corporations on US/common law matters and also act as local counsel for cross-border transactions. But you will certainly have opportunities to work with Korean attorneys at some point.

5.The last point w/r/t FLCs being looked down upon is just ridiculous. FLCs are respected in their own right and are not looked down upon for not going to SNU. In fact, a lot of the FLCs at K&C went to SNU for undergrad.

[Anonymous User]

Tagging on to OP's thread (I'm also interested in going to Korea in the future):

1. Is it true that most FLCs end up spending some (or more than some) time translating?
2. Are FLC's salaries comparable to salaries in the US?
3. Which practice area is most transferable?

Thanks in advance.

[screwtapeletters]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

This response just highlights why a bunch of strangers on the internet can’t be trusted lol

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

This response just highlights why a bunch of strangers on the internet can’t be trusted lol

Yeah well I was only there for a month and I still stand by my observations and discussions with FLCs and the friend I have. Like I said, take whatever I posted with a grain of salt. I'm just happy that this post got revived and now the OP can have better takes from actual FLCs.

I also stand by my SNU take. 4 FLCs from K&C low-key complained about it. Not only them, but my Korean-American friend too. A close LLM friend of mine who did SNU undergrad laughed when I told him about it since he thinks the same way too.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

Not sure how this person actually clerked at K&C and have this much misinformation. I want to point out a few things. I clerked at K&C during law school.

1. Most of the FLC at K&C are not from T6 + Penn. I would say 50% are from T14 and the rest from T50 or so.

2. No one makes partner at K&C. K&C is basically corporation/llc (or its Korean equivalent) that is owned by one person. No one has the title "Partner" at K&C, look it up. Also, Korean regulation has nothing to do with the title "Partner". It's just a title and it can be given to FLCs in Korea (and they are) if a firm in Korea chooses to do so.

3. Given the above, it can be somewhat difficult to distinguish between associates and partners (they are not technically partners in the sense of having equity ownership and title but their function is virtually identical to that of a partner at a traditional firm) at K&C. Check out the website, and you will quickly see that some are much more older/experienced than others, these people are "partners" at K&C.

4. From my experience, FLCs at K&C function separately from their Korean attorney colleagues most of the time. They counsel local Korean corporations on US/common law matters and also act as local counsel for cross-border transactions. But you will certainly have opportunities to work with Korean attorneys at some point.

5.The last point w/r/t FLCs being looked down upon is just ridiculous. FLCs are respected in their own right and are not looked down upon for not going to SNU. In fact, a lot of the FLCs at K&C went to SNU for undergrad.

I think you misunderstood most of my points (especially the bolded).

#1 Have you seen actual US/American biglaw partners lateral to K&C to become FLCs? I haven't. And why would they?

#2 Like I said, I wasn't sure if it was Korean regulations that would stop FLCs from becoming partner. I preceded that take in comparing the situation in Japan. Regardless of whether K&C is does mint partners, I've found that a senior FLC would never be at the same "level" as that of his/her counterpart. Jeffrey Jones however is an exception (and my Korean FLC mentor during my time there directly indicated as such).

#3 I don't know about you but most of the people I met during my time there were T6 + Penn. A Cornell Law grad here and there but that was it. One of my mentors were from Penn, and I graduated from one of these schools so maybe that's why I saw them more than the others. Nevertheless, my original post noted that the lawyers I talked to were from those schools. You might have had a different experience.

#4 Your point about the actual work done by an FLC is correct (e.g. "giving advice on cross-border deals" etc.) --- in my friend's words--and another FLC's--the FLC is the American-educated white guy that serves as a "mascot." Obviously there are also lawyers of Korean heritage who become FLCs so this characterization may be too generalized and stereotypical. It's funny because in my earlier career as a finance associate at a firm we did work with K&C and a lot of those international-type firms. That FLC's characterization of himself being a "mascot" rung true.

#5 About SNU, I still stand by my observations and whatever I've gleaned from friends, FLCs, and even one SNU grad. For what it's worth, it's not only in K&C that's like this. Heck, even Korean matchmakers (at least the ones my friends brought me to for fun) "ranked" SNU grads over American/European grads which was also really funny for me since I went to a state school for undergrad, so I guess it is what it is.

TLDR: just because your experiences don't match up with mine doesn't mean mine is inaccurate or yours is wrong.

[2013]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

Not sure how this person actually clerked at K&C and have this much misinformation. I want to point out a few things. I clerked at K&C during law school.

1. Most of the FLC at K&C are not from T6 + Penn. I would say 50% are from T14 and the rest from T50 or so.

2. No one makes partner at K&C. K&C is basically corporation/llc (or its Korean equivalent) that is owned by one person. No one has the title "Partner" at K&C, look it up. Also, Korean regulation has nothing to do with the title "Partner". It's just a title and it can be given to FLCs in Korea (and they are) if a firm in Korea chooses to do so.

3. Given the above, it can be somewhat difficult to distinguish between associates and partners (they are not technically partners in the sense of having equity ownership and title but their function is virtually identical to that of a partner at a traditional firm) at K&C. Check out the website, and you will quickly see that some are much more older/experienced than others, these people are "partners" at K&C.

4. From my experience, FLCs at K&C function separately from their Korean attorney colleagues most of the time. They counsel local Korean corporations on US/common law matters and also act as local counsel for cross-border transactions. But you will certainly have opportunities to work with Korean attorneys at some point.

5.The last point w/r/t FLCs being looked down upon is just ridiculous. FLCs are respected in their own right and are not looked down upon for not going to SNU. In fact, a lot of the FLCs at K&C went to SNU for undergrad.

I think you misunderstood most of my points (especially the bolded).

#1 Have you seen actual US/American biglaw partners lateral to K&C to become FLCs? I haven't. And why would they?

#2 Like I said, I wasn't sure if it was Korean regulations that would stop FLCs from becoming partner. I preceded that take in comparing the situation in Japan. Regardless of whether K&C is does mint partners, I've found that a senior FLC would never be at the same "level" as that of his/her counterpart. Jeffrey Jones however is an exception (and my Korean FLC mentor during my time there directly indicated as such).

#3 I don't know about you but most of the people I met during my time there were T6 + Penn. A Cornell Law grad here and there but that was it. One of my mentors were from Penn, and I graduated from one of these schools so maybe that's why I saw them more than the others. Nevertheless, my original post noted that the lawyers I talked to were from those schools. You might have had a different experience.

#4 Your point about the actual work done by an FLC is correct (e.g. "giving advice on cross-border deals" etc.) --- in my friend's words--and another FLC's--the FLC is the American-educated white guy that serves as a "mascot." Obviously there are also lawyers of Korean heritage who become FLCs so this characterization may be too generalized and stereotypical. It's funny because in my earlier career as a finance associate at a firm we did work with K&C and a lot of those international-type firms. That FLC's characterization of himself being a "mascot" rung true.

#5 About SNU, I still stand by my observations and whatever I've gleaned from friends, FLCs, and even one SNU grad. For what it's worth, it's not only in K&C that's like this. Heck, even Korean matchmakers (at least the ones my friends brought me to for fun) "ranked" SNU grads over American/European grads which was also really funny for me since I went to a state school for undergrad, so I guess it is what it is.

TLDR: just because your experiences don't match up with mine doesn't mean mine is inaccurate or yours is wrong.

I was bored, so I did a quick search of their cap markets Foreign Attorneys. Thank god the website is in English.

17 t14 (like 5 are Cornell and 2 are GT).
7 non-t14 (WUSTL, Fordham, GW, Iowa, New York Law School, Rutgers and Michigan State).

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any experience or knowledge about being an FLC at Kim & Chang (or any other comparable Korean firm)? I'm wondering:

- When people typically lateral in (i.e., do they lateral when they're junior associates, senior associates, or partners at a US firm);
- What the lateralling process is like;
- How compensation and treatment compare to the Korean lawyers there (e.g., better or worse pay, more or less work, promotion);
- FLC vs. Korean lawyers' dynamics (e.g., indifference, respect, healthy rivalry, animosity); and
- What firm culture is like if FLC culture differs from the Korean lawyers' culture.

Thanks y'all!

I was a legal clerk/intern at K&C during law school. I got to talk to a lot of FLCs and a friend of mine--who's Korean-American--was actually thinking of going that route before she ultimately decided to stay stateside. Here's my take, but take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, I'm not an FLC.

- People lateral in when they're midlevels/seniors. I have yet to see an actual partner become an FLC. IMO, that probably won't make financial sense for the partner. The FLCs at K&C and in some firms I talked to are all from t14 (a lot are from T6 + Penn).

- As for the lateralling process, you can apply online through the web portal. However, it'd be better if you actually had a connection with someone in the firm. I'd check the attorney profiles and see if any graduated from the same law school as you. When you actually do get an offer, an FLC told me the firm pays for your travel arrangements and helps you get situated in Korea.

- For compensation, I got the impression that FLCs make less than their Korean counterparts. I also found that the FLCs didn't really do traditional biglaw (or even worse, "Korean biglaw") hours. As for promotions, I think you just become an FLC your whole life. I'm not sure if K&C makes FLCs partners. The one American that comes to mind is Jeffrey Jones who's been there since the 70s but even he doesn't have "Partner" on his byline. I'm not even sure if it's possible given Korea's regulations (I know in Japan--in Anderson Mori--FLCs can't make partner and are generally "below" that of Japanese attorneys). My friend who was thinking about becoming an FLC in Korea didn't like this dynamic--she said for the most part, FLCs are like "mascots" for the firm, showing how prestigious the firm is so much that it could afford and get a T14 American dude.

- And with respect to dynamics, FLCs are certainly respected but, again, I found that their role was a bit on a lower rung than an actual Korean attorney. Like I said, this may lead to better hours, but there won't be promotions--at least to partnership--and you won't ever be taking leadership in the firm or maybe even in individual case. If you're Korean (I'm not), you'd also be viewed as less capable and competent than an attorney who has SNU on his/her resume--whether for undergrad or law.

Not sure how this person actually clerked at K&C and have this much misinformation. I want to point out a few things. I clerked at K&C during law school.

1. Most of the FLC at K&C are not from T6 + Penn. I would say 50% are from T14 and the rest from T50 or so.

2. No one makes partner at K&C. K&C is basically corporation/llc (or its Korean equivalent) that is owned by one person. No one has the title "Partner" at K&C, look it up. Also, Korean regulation has nothing to do with the title "Partner". It's just a title and it can be given to FLCs in Korea (and they are) if a firm in Korea chooses to do so.

3. Given the above, it can be somewhat difficult to distinguish between associates and partners (they are not technically partners in the sense of having equity ownership and title but their function is virtually identical to that of a partner at a traditional firm) at K&C. Check out the website, and you will quickly see that some are much more older/experienced than others, these people are "partners" at K&C.

4. From my experience, FLCs at K&C function separately from their Korean attorney colleagues most of the time. They counsel local Korean corporations on US/common law matters and also act as local counsel for cross-border transactions. But you will certainly have opportunities to work with Korean attorneys at some point.

5.The last point w/r/t FLCs being looked down upon is just ridiculous. FLCs are respected in their own right and are not looked down upon for not going to SNU. In fact, a lot of the FLCs at K&C went to SNU for undergrad.

I think you misunderstood most of my points (especially the bolded).

#1 Have you seen actual US/American biglaw partners lateral to K&C to become FLCs? I haven't. And why would they?

#2 Like I said, I wasn't sure if it was Korean regulations that would stop FLCs from becoming partner. I preceded that take in comparing the situation in Japan. Regardless of whether K&C is does mint partners, I've found that a senior FLC would never be at the same "level" as that of his/her counterpart. Jeffrey Jones however is an exception (and my Korean FLC mentor during my time there directly indicated as such).

#3 I don't know about you but most of the people I met during my time there were T6 + Penn. A Cornell Law grad here and there but that was it. One of my mentors were from Penn, and I graduated from one of these schools so maybe that's why I saw them more than the others. Nevertheless, my original post noted that the lawyers I talked to were from those schools. You might have had a different experience.

#4 Your point about the actual work done by an FLC is correct (e.g. "giving advice on cross-border deals" etc.) --- in my friend's words--and another FLC's--the FLC is the American-educated white guy that serves as a "mascot." Obviously there are also lawyers of Korean heritage who become FLCs so this characterization may be too generalized and stereotypical. It's funny because in my earlier career as a finance associate at a firm we did work with K&C and a lot of those international-type firms. That FLC's characterization of himself being a "mascot" rung true.

#5 About SNU, I still stand by my observations and whatever I've gleaned from friends, FLCs, and even one SNU grad. For what it's worth, it's not only in K&C that's like this. Heck, even Korean matchmakers (at least the ones my friends brought me to for fun) "ranked" SNU grads over American/European grads which was also really funny for me since I went to a state school for undergrad, so I guess it is what it is.

TLDR: just because your experiences don't match up with mine doesn't mean mine is inaccurate or yours is wrong.

I was bored, so I did a quick search of their cap markets Foreign Attorneys. Thank god the website is in English.

17 t14 (like 5 are Cornell and 2 are GT).
7 non-t14 (WUSTL, Fordham, GW, Iowa, New York Law School, Rutgers and Michigan State).

For the life of me I never met those 7 non-t14 grads while I was there. At the risk of outing myself, one of my mentors was Marina Moon and I got assignments/developed relationships (as one can develop as a clerk) from Daniel Jang, Josh Schwab, Hyung Chung, and Ryan Russell. I met 5-6 others who went to the schools in the T6 + Penn range. Only Jeffrey Jones from BYU kind of broke that mold for me.

[Anonymous User]

According to a JD K&C lawyer I spoke to over the phone, the structure of K&C as mentioned above means that each person's salary/income is negotiated to a certain point and is far more individualized than here in the US. I'm sure there are bands in connection to your experience and as you become more senior there is more room for negotiation depending on what you bring to the firm.

Even with the variability, pay is usually much lower than U.S. market pay because salary expectations for Korean lawyers are lower in general, and I wouldn't expect them to pay significantly more/less because you're a U.S. JD / FLC. Never heard of a pay bump from someone moving from US -> Korean firm, always a pay cut.

[Anonymous User]

There's so much misinformation here. I really would like to hear from someone that went from NYC V50 to K&C regarding compensation. In terms of work, the FLCs at K&C are divided into 3 groups: (i) group A consisting of elites from top law firms in the US with good pedigrees - these people negotiate main transaction documents and essentially work like how they used to work in the US; (ii) group B consisting of associates with good pedigrees that failed to get a biglaw job out of law school - these are mediocre associates that do a mix of typical biglaw tasks like drafting as well as translation; and (iii) group C consisting of associates that are there just because of their connections to clients - most of these went to law schools I have never heard of and don't really have meaningful biglaw experience.

[Anonymous User]

There's so much misinformation here. I really would like to hear from someone that went from NYC V50 to K&C regarding compensation. In terms of work, the FLCs at K&C are divided into 3 groups: (i) group A consisting of elites from top law firms in the US with good pedigrees - these people negotiate main transaction documents and essentially work like how they used to work in the US; (ii) group B consisting of associates with good pedigrees that failed to get a biglaw job out of law school - these are mediocre associates that do a mix of typical biglaw tasks like drafting as well as translation; and (iii) group C consisting of associates that are there just because of their connections to clients - most of these went to law schools I have never heard of and don't really have meaningful biglaw experience.

I think this poster nailed it. I would love to hear re: compensation as well

[Anonymous User]

Just found this thread. I was an FLC at K&C for 5+ years. My information may not be completely up to date, as I've been out for years, but I believe the gist of it is.

1) Historically, K&C drew FLCs heavily from T14 schools and with BigLaw experience; the firm paid these attorneys on par with NYC biglaw salaries. Yes, there was also an expat package with a rent allowance and moving expenses borne by the firm. Billable expectations are (or were) 2000 hours. In the golden days (1997-2007), the work was very interesting and comparable to what you'd see as a BigLaw associate, and the compensation as good or even better. I would say an FLC who earned trust could have more freedom and authority than you might have as a junior or midlevel in an NYC firm.

2) After or during the Global Financial Crisis (2008-09), everything started to change for the worse. For one, the firm started to hire a flood of FLCs, misreading the GFC as a reprise of the Asian financial crisis, which was K&C's peak demand period. Trouble was, the G stood for global, and the influx of foreign investment, by and large, did not occur, as it had in the 1998-2001 period. The firm also recognized that it was top heavy with senior, expensive FLCs, some of whom spoke little Korean (which was not required), but the K&C client base had changed, to include much more local Korean company work (less foreign) and fewer Western GCs to work with. China has also become important but few of the FLCs speak or read Mandarin.

These new FLCs were either very junior, jobless ones who could be hired at a much lower rate (often with no expat benefits, as they are Korean), or (occasionally) even partner level, ethnic Korean lawyers from US firms, that came at affordable prices (often after being forced out in the US recession). The supply of FLCs ballooned from 30-40 during the Golden Era, to over 150 and counting at a time of much weaker demand.

3) The other major, mostly adverse change was the threat of the market opening to US/British firms after the KORUS FTA was passed. This has not changed the legal demand landscape as much as once feared IMO, but it did change the autonomy/freedom that FLCs enjoyed under #1. So #2 reduced the value of FLCs work (and put downward pressure on comp), and #1 made the work much less impactful and under much tighter supervision. The firm feared that FLCs might "defect" and, I felt, held us at arm's length at times, absent a demonstration of firm loyalty.

4) The earlier poster was correct that K&C is essentially a sole proprietorship and there's no equity shared with FLCs. Jeff Jones is cited often as a true FLC "partner" but he's the exception that proves the rule; your experience at K&C will not resemble his. It's not the 1990s anymore. The higher performing (and better politically connected) FLCs can do quite well, but it's all cash and you will be expected to bill month after month, and you will not be allowed to "own" or leverage the client relationship. If you don't bill and continue to play by the firm's rules, the firm will basically "de-salary" you after about 10 years of service and put you on a "meter" system, which pays out a percentage of your collected billables (congrats, you're an independent contractor at age 50). This creates huge pressure as your income can fluctuate wildly, even month to month, and you're taking collection risk. Many of the Korean attorneys are on the same system, and are therefore incentivized to pad billables to maximize their income, which leads to further write downs or defections when clients get frustrated and leave.

5) So in sum, the early years of K&C were fantastic, and the first couple of years an FLC arrives (assuming a fixed salary) can be quite interesting and rewarding. There are still many fine people there, but much of what made it professionally rewarding is basically gone now. You will have the security of an Uber driver if you join today, and your outplacement opportunities outside Korea are basically zero. If you are not fluent in Korean, and you hope to have a real legal career, I would not recommend going there.

[Anonymous User]

Just found this thread. I was an FLC at K&C for 5+ years. My information may not be completely up to date, as I've been out for years, but I believe the gist of it is.

1) Historically, K&C drew FLCs heavily from T14 schools and with BigLaw experience; the firm paid these attorneys on par with NYC biglaw salaries. Yes, there was also an expat package with a rent allowance and moving expenses borne by the firm. Billable expectations are (or were) 2000 hours. In the golden days (1997-2007), the work was very interesting and comparable to what you'd see as a BigLaw associate, and the compensation as good or even better. I would say an FLC who earned trust could have more freedom and authority than you might have as a junior or midlevel in an NYC firm.

2) After or during the Global Financial Crisis (2008-09), everything started to change for the worse. For one, the firm started to hire a flood of FLCs, misreading the GFC as a reprise of the Asian financial crisis, which was K&C's peak demand period. Trouble was, the G stood for global, and the influx of foreign investment, by and large, did not occur, as it had in the 1998-2001 period. The firm also recognized that it was top heavy with senior, expensive FLCs, some of whom spoke little Korean (which was not required), but the K&C client base had changed, to include much more local Korean company work (less foreign) and fewer Western GCs to work with. China has also become important but few of the FLCs speak or read Mandarin.

These new FLCs were either very junior, jobless ones who could be hired at a much lower rate (often with no expat benefits, as they are Korean), or (occasionally) even partner level, ethnic Korean lawyers from US firms, that came at affordable prices (often after being forced out in the US recession). The supply of FLCs ballooned from 30-40 during the Golden Era, to over 150 and counting at a time of much weaker demand.

3) The other major, mostly adverse change was the threat of the market opening to US/British firms after the KORUS FTA was passed. This has not changed the legal demand landscape as much as once feared IMO, but it did change the autonomy/freedom that FLCs enjoyed under #1. So #2 reduced the value of FLCs work (and put downward pressure on comp), and #1 made the work much less impactful and under much tighter supervision. The firm feared that FLCs might "defect" and, I felt, held us at arm's length at times, absent a demonstration of firm loyalty.

4) The earlier poster was correct that K&C is essentially a sole proprietorship and there's no equity shared with FLCs. Jeff Jones is cited often as a true FLC "partner" but he's the exception that proves the rule; your experience at K&C will not resemble his. It's not the 1990s anymore. The higher performing (and better politically connected) FLCs can do quite well, but it's all cash and you will be expected to bill month after month, and you will not be allowed to "own" or leverage the client relationship. If you don't bill and continue to play by the firm's rules, the firm will basically "de-salary" you after about 10 years of service and put you on a "meter" system, which pays out a percentage of your collected billables (congrats, you're an independent contractor at age 50). This creates huge pressure as your income can fluctuate wildly, even month to month, and you're taking collection risk. Many of the Korean attorneys are on the same system, and are therefore incentivized to pad billables to maximize their income, which leads to further write downs or defections when clients get frustrated and leave.

5) So in sum, the early years of K&C were fantastic, and the first couple of years an FLC arrives (assuming a fixed salary) can be quite interesting and rewarding. There are still many fine people there, but much of what made it professionally rewarding is basically gone now. You will have the security of an Uber driver if you join today, and your outplacement opportunities outside Korea are basically zero. If you are not fluent in Korean, and you hope to have a real legal career, I would not recommend going there.

[the lsat failure]

Just found this thread. I was an FLC at K&C for 5+ years. My information may not be completely up to date, as I've been out for years, but I believe the gist of it is.

1) Historically, K&C drew FLCs heavily from T14 schools and with BigLaw experience; the firm paid these attorneys on par with NYC biglaw salaries. Yes, there was also an expat package with a rent allowance and moving expenses borne by the firm. Billable expectations are (or were) 2000 hours. In the golden days (1997-2007), the work was very interesting and comparable to what you'd see as a BigLaw associate, and the compensation as good or even better. I would say an FLC who earned trust could have more freedom and authority than you might have as a junior or midlevel in an NYC firm.

2) After or during the Global Financial Crisis (2008-09), everything started to change for the worse. For one, the firm started to hire a flood of FLCs, misreading the GFC as a reprise of the Asian financial crisis, which was K&C's peak demand period. Trouble was, the G stood for global, and the influx of foreign investment, by and large, did not occur, as it had in the 1998-2001 period. The firm also recognized that it was top heavy with senior, expensive FLCs, some of whom spoke little Korean (which was not required), but the K&C client base had changed, to include much more local Korean company work (less foreign) and fewer Western GCs to work with. China has also become important but few of the FLCs speak or read Mandarin.

These new FLCs were either very junior, jobless ones who could be hired at a much lower rate (often with no expat benefits, as they are Korean), or (occasionally) even partner level, ethnic Korean lawyers from US firms, that came at affordable prices (often after being forced out in the US recession). The supply of FLCs ballooned from 30-40 during the Golden Era, to over 150 and counting at a time of much weaker demand.

3) The other major, mostly adverse change was the threat of the market opening to US/British firms after the KORUS FTA was passed. This has not changed the legal demand landscape as much as once feared IMO, but it did change the autonomy/freedom that FLCs enjoyed under #1. So #2 reduced the value of FLCs work (and put downward pressure on comp), and #1 made the work much less impactful and under much tighter supervision. The firm feared that FLCs might "defect" and, I felt, held us at arm's length at times, absent a demonstration of firm loyalty.

4) The earlier poster was correct that K&C is essentially a sole proprietorship and there's no equity shared with FLCs. Jeff Jones is cited often as a true FLC "partner" but he's the exception that proves the rule; your experience at K&C will not resemble his. It's not the 1990s anymore. The higher performing (and better politically connected) FLCs can do quite well, but it's all cash and you will be expected to bill month after month, and you will not be allowed to "own" or leverage the client relationship. If you don't bill and continue to play by the firm's rules, the firm will basically "de-salary" you after about 10 years of service and put you on a "meter" system, which pays out a percentage of your collected billables (congrats, you're an independent contractor at age 50). This creates huge pressure as your income can fluctuate wildly, even month to month, and you're taking collection risk. Many of the Korean attorneys are on the same system, and are therefore incentivized to pad billables to maximize their income, which leads to further write downs or defections when clients get frustrated and leave.

5) So in sum, the early years of K&C were fantastic, and the first couple of years an FLC arrives (assuming a fixed salary) can be quite interesting and rewarding. There are still many fine people there, but much of what made it professionally rewarding is basically gone now. You will have the security of an Uber driver if you join today, and your outplacement opportunities outside Korea are basically zero. If you are not fluent in Korean, and you hope to have a real legal career, I would not recommend going there.

Thanks for the information, this is probably the most helpful piece in this thread. Are you still in the Korean market practicing law? Would like to ask some more questions through PM if you'd be open to it.