確定期限이 있는 채권의 소멸시효 起算日에 관한 短見

Abstract

Regarding the obligatory right to have a starting point(the obligatory right with fixed term), in the calculation of the date, the extinctive prescription is generally considered to be started from the time the due date is reached, still it is questionable whether the day appointed for payment is included in the proceed of the extinctive prescription. While this is unlikely to be a problem in practice, it is likely to be helpful in understanding the principle of exclusion of the date on which the period commences and the our extinction prescription system. On this issue two approaches are possible in the interpretation of the Korean Civil Code, but the majority of the view was that the extinctive prescription would go into effect from the following day. I believe that all of the above views have rationality within our civil law system, but I think it is more reasonable to include the date of reimbursement in the calculation of the statute of limitations. There are three reasons for this: First, there is no reason not to include a full day in the reasonable interpretation of Article 157 of the Civil Code on period. This is not subject to the principle of exclusion of the date on which the period commences. Second, interpreting the contents of a statement made by the parties makes it difficult to say that the party with a right is motivated to limit the scope of the exercise of rights on its own on that day. Finally, it may be noted that, on the day of due date, no legal impediment exists and the exercise of rights is possible in relation to the proceed of extinctive prescription.