logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016.10.27 2016다224183
채무부존재확인
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the allegation in the grounds of appeal on the extinctive prescription, the exercise of the right of defense based on the extinctive prescription by the obligor is subject to the principle of good faith and prohibition of abuse of rights, which are the major principles of our Civil Act. As such, where there are special circumstances, such as where the obligor has made it impossible or considerably difficult for the obligee to exercise his right or extinctive prescription prior to the completion of prescription, or acted to make it unnecessary for the obligee to believe that such measures are unnecessary, or where there exist any objective grounds for obstructing the obligee from exercising his right, or where the obligor has made the right holder trust, or where there are such special circumstances as where the obligor has made the obligor receive the repayment of the obligation after the completion of prescription, or where there are other conditions such as where the obligor has made the right holder receive the repayment of the obligation, and there is a great need to protect the obligee,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da32332 Decided October 25, 2002). However, the exclusion of, or restriction on, the individual legal system in accordance with the specific contents of the individual legal system as prescribed by the positive law is not likely to lower the legal stability, which is one of the important legal values to be realized in the interpretation and application of the Act.

In particular, considering that the indefinite part of the extinctive prescription system has no choice but to be inherent in the legal relationship, the purport is to establish a certain time limit in the assertion of the legal relationship, thereby seeking to see the dispute between the parties. Therefore, considering the fact that the primary system has primary and objective meaning, the demand for legal stability is more obvious.

arrow