Claim under the Local Finance Act and short term extinctive prescription under Civil Act

The claim stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 163 of the Civil Act is required for the short-term extinctive prescription of three years shorter than the five years stipulated in Article 53 of the Local Finance Act, and since there are special provisions in other Acts prescribed in the same Article, even if monetary claim is a claim stipulated in Article 53 of the Local Finance Act, the provisions under Article 163 of the Civil Act apply to the short-term extinctive prescription.

Article 163 of the Civil Act, Article 53 of the Local Finance Act

Supreme Court Decision 77Da751 Decided July 4, 1967 delivered on December 13, 197

Attorney Lee Ho-ho, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Crossing-gun et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 79Na2016 delivered on March 13, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below recognized that personnel expenses and construction supervision expenses incurred by the plaintiff were claims for this construction work based on the contract concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant in the judgment that the plaintiff would be paid from the defendants, and judged that this is claims subject to the short-term extinctive prescription under Article 163 subparagraph 3 of the Civil Act. In light of the records, the court below was just and there was no violation of the rules of evidence and there was no violation of the rules of evidence in the lawsuit, and the claims provided in each subparagraph of Article 163 of the Civil Act are subject to the short-term extinctive prescription for three years which is shorter than five years under Article 53 of the Local Finance Act of the lawsuit under Article 53 of the Local Finance Act. Thus, since there were special provisions in other laws prescribed in the same Article, the above monetary claims against the defendants, a local government, were not subject to the short-term extinctive prescription under Article 163 of the above Civil Act, and there were no errors in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the short-term extinctive prescription period under Article 1637Da137.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Hong-chul (Presiding Justice)