소멸시효와 신의칙

Prescription and Good Faith Principle

Prescription and the precept of good faith principle seem to create considerable tension when confronted with each other. This is partly due to the fact that the former is in pursuit of legal certainty, while the latter is in pursuit of equitable outcome. However, these two precepts are in line with each other, for the law of prescription has already incorporated the rationale of good faith within its system. Therefore, good faith principle is, in a sense, a building block for the law of prescription. Equity, which is pursued by good faith principle, can be realized through various mechanisms within the law of prescription, including commencement of the prescription period, renewal and waiver of the right to invoke prescription. Furthermore, Korean courts have been showing favorable stance toward the creditor in operating the above mechanisms. With this in mind, invoking on the good faith principle in order to make the defence of prescription inadmissible should be done in great caution. In general, this is only applicable when the defendant has actively and culpably caused considerable difficulty of raising the claim. However, once good faith principle steps in, it should be flexible enough to reach equitable outcome. This flexibility needs to be allowed in setting the period of raising the claim again after the difficulty disappears, or in determining the scope of liability that the defendant should bear.