All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal on extinctive prescription

A. The exercise of the obligor’s right of defense based on the statute of limitations is subject to the control of the principle of good faith and the prohibition of abuse of rights, which are the major principles of our Civil Act. Thus, where there are special circumstances, such as the obligor’s exercise of the obligee’s right or the interruption of prescription prior to the completion of the statute of limitations, the obligor’s act of making it impossible or considerably difficult for the obligee to exercise the obligee’s right or the interruption of prescription; the obligee’s act was committed to believe that such measures are unnecessary; the obligee was objectively obstructed; or the obligor was not able to invoke the statute of limitations after the completion of the statute of limitations; the obligor made the obligee trusted the obligor; there was a great need to protect the obligee; and other creditors of the same condition receive the repayment of the obligation; etc., the obligor

(1) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the principle of good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith, the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of trust and good faith should be applied.

In particular, the extinctive prescription system aims to establish a certain time limit in the assertion of legal relations so as to raise a dispute between the parties. Considering that the passage of time for which non-discriminatory and objective application has been designed to have the primary meaning, the demand for legal stability is more clearly raised.

Therefore, it is reasonable to judge that the argument for the completion of extinctive prescription is not allowed in violation of the good faith principle.