메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국재산법학회 재산법연구 재산법연구 제26권 제1호
발행연도
2009.1
수록면
1 - 43 (43page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
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.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (28)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0