Development of the Speed Limit Model for Harbour and Waterway(Ⅱ) - The Method of Speed Limit Decision and Application -

Deug-Bong Kim,Kwang An 해양환경안전학회 2015 海洋環境安全學會誌 Vol.21 No.3

This research is the result on calculating the logical speed limit through certain process which some elements must be considered on selecting the speed limit of harbour and waterway. The suggested speed limit select model on this research is processed from 1~6 steps by forming a professional group of experts. Each step has its information which 1st step(water division), 2nd step(selecting the model vessel and vessel applied with speed limit.), 3rd step(selecting the maximum and minimum speed range on each section), 4th step(evaluation on the safeness of traffic), 5th step(suggesting the appropriate speed limit), 6th step(execution and evaluation.). The appropriate speed limit was decided on consideration of the safety of maritime traffic on the range of the maximum speed and the minimum speed. This model was used to derive the appropriate speed limit on the harbour water and Busan harbour entrance waterway. As the result, the harbour water was calculated to be 6.9 knots, the appropriate speed limit of Busan entrance harbour was 9.3 knots. The present calculation of the speed limit on the approaching channel area is 10 knots, inner harbour area is 7 knots, which are similar to the result of the speed limit. This research is the first research on selecting the speed limit model and has its limits on finding the perfect speed limit result. More detailed standards on the safeness of traffic evaluation must be found and additional study is necessary on discriminating consideration of the elements. This research has its value which it provides instances of aboard cases on guidelines of selecting the speed limit.

Revisit of LLD Requirements for Airborne Discharges From PWRs in Line With Effluent Concentration Limit

Soyun Kim,Jae Hak Cheong 한국방사성폐기물학회 2022 한국방사성폐기물학회 학술논문요약집 Vol.20 No.1

Radioactive effluent discharged from the nuclear power plant (NPP) during normal operation is controlled by the discharge limit in terms of radioactivity concentration (Bq·m−3) and dose constraints in Korea. To ensure compliance with discharge limits of effluents, the licensee operates radioactive effluent monitoring systems in each discharge point to detect radioactivity and control discharge. The predetermined regulatory requirements of analytical sensitivities for sampling devices in the monitoring system are established in various countries to guarantee the performance of the monitoring systems. In Korea, Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) are selected as the regulatory requirements and adopted from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) NUREG-1301. The International Atomic Energy Agency stated that the detection limits have to be low enough (e.g., less than 1% of discharge limits) to safely demonstrate compliance with the discharge limits. However, no technical background of LLD has been explained regarding the compliance with discharge limits in Korea. Thus, it is necessary to analyze the compatibility of discharge limits and detection limits. The USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.21 has stated the risk-informed approach for effluent control by identifying the principal radionuclides whose radiological impact is more than 1% of discharge limits. In 2017, Cheong proposed the methodology and derived risk-based detection limits for liquid effluents from Korean NPPs. In 2019, Choi derived risk-based detection limits for liquid and gaseous effluents based on APR 1400 Design Control Document (DCD). The methodology of those studies can derive the detection limit for each principal radionuclide that is comparable to 1% to 10% of discharge limits. However, the previous study based on APR 1400 DCD was for the discharge limits of the US and didn’t consider the multiple discharge points in the reactor. Therefore, this study preliminarily derived the risk-based detection limits consistent with Korean Effluent Concentration Limits for gaseous effluents reflecting the characteristics of each discharge point. Also, this study confirmed the validity of risk-based detection limits and current LLD. This study is expected to be basic research for detection limits of Korean NPPs in line with international safety standards.

Development of the Speed Limit Model for Harbour and Waterway(Ⅱ) - The Method of Speed Limit Decision and Application -

김득봉,안광 해양환경안전학회 2015 海洋環境安全學會誌 Vol.21 No.3

This research is the result on calculating the logical speed limit through certain process which some elements must be considered on selecting the speed limit of harbour and waterway. The suggested speed limit select model on this research is processed from 1~6 steps by forming a professional group of experts. Each step has its information which 1st step(water division), 2nd step(selecting the model vessel and vessel applied with speed limit.), 3rd step(selecting the maximum and minimum speed range on each section), 4th step(evaluation on the safeness of traffic), 5th step(suggesting the appropriate speed limit), 6th step(execution and evaluation.). The appropriate speed limit was decided on consideration of the safety of maritime traffic on the range of the maximum speed and the minimum speed. This model was used to derive the appropriate speed limit on the harbour water and Busan harbour entrance waterway. As the result, the harbour water was calculated to be 6.9knots, the appropriate speed limit of Busan entrance harbour was 9.3knots. The present calculation of the speed limit on the approaching channel area is 10knots, inner harbour area is 7knots, which are similar to the result of the speed limit. This research is the first research on selecting the speed limit model and has its limits on finding the perfect speed limit result. More detailed standards on the safeness of traffic evaluation must be found and additional study is necessary on discriminating consideration of the elements. This research has its value which it provides instances of aboard cases on guidelines of selecting the speed limit.

청구범위 기재 중 소극적 한정사항

김동준(Kim, Dong-Jun) 충남대학교 법학연구소 2016 法學硏究 Vol.27 No.1

청구범위에 기재되는 발명은 적극적 한정사항(positive limitations)으로 기재되는 것이 일반적이고 또 바람직하겠지만 소극적 한정사항(negative limitations)을 통해 보호범위를 최적화하는 것이 필요한 경우도 있을 수 있다. 현행 특허청 심사기준의 경우 청구범위에 ‘소극적 한정사항’이 기재되는 것 자체를 일절 금지하고 있지는 않고 소극적 한정사항이 사용되더라도 청구범위 기재요건을 충족하면 문제가 없다고 하여 허용될 ‘여지’는 남기고 있지만, 소극적 한정사항의 기재에 원칙적으로 부정적 입장에 있는 것으로 보이는데, 소극적 한정사항의 기재는 다음과 같은 이유로 허용될 필요가 있다고 생각된다. 첫째, 명확성 요건을 충족하는 한 발명을 특정함에 있어 방법 · 기능 등 다양한 기재가 허용되고 있음(특허법 제42조 제6항)에 비추어 볼 때 소극적 한정사항에 대해서만 부정적으로 취급할 필요가 없다. 둘째, 유럽특허청 · 미국 · 일본 · PCT 가이드라인 모두 소극적 한정사항의 기재를 허용하고 있는데, 이와 같은 국제적 추세에 부합할 필요가 있다. 한편, 심사기준의 개정 시에는 소극적 한정사항과 관련하여 ‘명세서 기재요건 충족 여부 판단기준’ 및 ‘보정에 의한 도입 허 · 부 판단기준’이 제시될 필요가 있는데 다음과 같은 내용을 반영할 필요가 있다. 우선 명확성 요건의 경우 소극적 한정사항에 의해 청구항에 기재된 발명(A)으로부터 일정 부분(a)이 제외되고, 결과적으로 잔여부분(A-a)이 청구범위에 남는 경우, 제외되기 전의 발명의 범위(A), 제외대상(a) 및 잔여부분(A-a)이 명확하다면 명확성 요건은 충족되는 것으로 볼 수 있을 것이다. 다음으로 뒷받침 요건 충족 여부나 보정 허 · 부 판단(신규사항 추가 여부 판단) 기준의 경우 소극적 한정사항을 기재한 제외 청구항이 최초 명세서 · 도면의 명시적 · 묵시적 개시범위를 넘어 새로운 기술사항을 도입하는 것인지 여부라는 기본원칙을 중심으로 하면서 유럽특허청 · 미국 · 일본에서 공통적으로 인정하고 있는 유형을 먼저 심사기준에 포섭하되 유럽특허청 · 미국 · 일본에서 다소 차이가 있는 부분은 향후 사안별로 신중히 검토해 나가는 것이 바람직할 것으로 생각된다. 마지막으로 소극적 한정사항의 기재를 허용하자는 것이 소극적 한정사항의 기재를 무제한적으로 허용하자는 것이 아니라는 점을 밝혀 둔다. 앞서 살펴본 바와 같이 소극적 한정사항이 명세서 기재요건이나 보정요건을 충족하는지 여부는 유형을 나누어 사안별로 검토할 문제다. 또한, 소극적 한정사항을 제한 없이 허용할 경우 출원인의 행동에도 악영향을 미치게 될 것이고 청구범위 작성 방법에도 변화를 초래할 것이다. 결국 소극적 한정사항의 기재와 관련한 쟁점 판단에 있어서도 다른 청구범위 기재형식의 경우와 마찬가지로 적절한 보호를 구하는 출원인의 이해와 합리적 노력으로 보호범위를 판단해야 하는 공중의 이해 사이에 균형을 찾는 노력이 필요할 것이다. A claim"s subject-matter is normally and preferably defined in terms of positive limitations indicating that certain technical elements are present. However, negative limitations help to define the claimed invention in some cases. According to the Patent Examination Guidelines in the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), although negative limitations may be allowable exceptionally so long as there are not indefinite, negative limitations are usually deemed to make the claim indefinite. This article proposes that the KIPO practice be changed so that a claim may include a negative limitation since there is nothing per se ambiguous or uncertain about a negative limitation. First of all, according to article 42 paragraph 6 of the Patent Act, claim limitations such as functions and processes may be used to define the claim. Negative limitations should be treated in the same way as other forms of claim limitations. In other words, negative limitations should be allowed so long as they are definite and supported by the description. Next, we need to make our practice in harmony with those of the EPO, US, and Japan. Specifically, the Patent Examination Guidelines should be changed as follows. When it comes to determining the definiteness of a claim containing disclaimers, this should be decided by establishing not only the subject matter to be excluded but also the subject matter remaining in the claim are definite. In addition, determining whether a claim containing disclaimers meets the support requirement or no new matter requirement requires an assessment of whether the skilled person is presented with new information beyond the subject matter expressly or implicitly disclosed in the application as filed. Like in EPO, U.S. and Japan, a mere disclaimer excluding a conflicting application or a mere disclaimer excluding subject matter not eligible for patent protection may be allowable. The allowability of other types of disclaimers should be reviewed carefully. The argument that disclaimers should be allowed does not mean that there should be no restrictions on the drafting of disclaimers. The answer to the question of allowability of disclaimers may be different depending on the circumstances of the individual case under consideration. Disclaimers without restriction may lead to providing an opportunity for the applicant to reshape his claims arbitrarily and to a claim drafting which puts an unreasonable burden on the public to find out what is protected and what is not protected. When it comes to determining the allowability of disclaimers, as in respect of other forms of claim limitations, a balance has to be struck between the interest of the applicant in obtaining adequate protection and the interest of the public in determining the scope of protection with reasonable effort.

수치한정발명에서 수치한정의 해석과 그 적용

구성진 한국법학원 2022 저스티스 Vol.- No.191

Numerical limitation invention means an “invention expressed by specifying elements with numerical values.” Numerically limited inventions can be divided into two types: One is a simple numerical limitation that a person having ordinary skill in the art can properly drive through ordinary and repetitive experiments because such numerical values are merely to suggest a proper working scope or mode of the invention, lacking special technological features (untrue numerical limitation invention) and the other is true numerical limitation invention that has critical significance or significant effect. The main issue here is how to read objective numerical values-which is more objective than ordinary words- in claims. The paper reviews the effects described in the specification, the technical problems and features of patented inventions, the description of numerical limitations, the particular feature of numbers, an analysis of embodiment and comparative experimental examples, an analysis of prior arts, general problems in technical fields, and the recognition of those having ordinary skill in the art, the portion intentionally excluded from the claims and the cases with no dispute between the parties in the litigations or trials as well as containing the discussions with analysis of relevant judgments. Not only that, the paper looks at how challenged inventions can be determined and how to decide whether an invention is identical in the scope of rights confirmation action, the written description requirement, determination of novelty and an inventive step, as well as the equivalent relation, all depending on the types of inventions– whether they are true or untrue numerical limitations–along with judgments. In particular, through the analysis of these judgments, the following factors have become obvious: 1) For the written description requirements, it is necessary to identify what requirements enable and support the invention by simply examining the characteristics of the numerically limited invention in the specification alone, 2) When determining an inventive step and novelty, the scope for denial of an inventive step and novelty may vary depending on whether the invention falls into untrue or true numerical limitation, 3) When determining the equivalent relation, the elements of the numerical limitation should be first considered with the means to solve the problem of the patent, followed by the normative interpretation of whether the above elements fall under the scope of the patent right in relation to the challenged invention. As discussed in this paper, it is hoped that this paper will serve as a practical and theoretical reference in applying the characteristics of numerically limited inventions by classifying them into untrue and true numerical limitations. 수치한정발명이란 “구성요소의 범위를 수치로써 한정하여 표현한 발명”을 말한다. 수치한정발명에서는 한정된 수치범위가 단순히 발명의 적당한 실시 범위나 형태 등을 제시하기 위한 것으로서 그 자체에 별다른 기술적 특징이 없어 통상의 기술자가 적절히 선택하여 실시할 수 있는 정도의 단순한 수치한정으로서 그 기술분야에서 통상의 기술자가 통상적이고 반복적인 실험을 통하여 적절히 선택할 수 있는 부진정 수치한정과 임계적 의의가 있거나 현저한 양적 또는 이질적 차이를 가져오는 등의 진정 수치한정으로 나누어 볼 수 있다. 이는 일반적인 문언보다 더욱 객관적이라고 할 수 있는 수치를 대상으로 한 청구범위의 해석문제이다. 이 논문에서는 명세서에 기재된 효과, 특허발명의 기술적 과제 내지 특징, 수치한정에 관한 기재, 수치의 특성, 실시예와 비교 실험예의 분석, 선행발명의 분석, 해당 기술분야의 일반적 과제와 통상의 기술자의 인식, 의식적 제외, 소송상 또는 심판절차상 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없는 경우를 제시하고 그에 관하여 논의한 다음 해당하는 판결례를 분석해 본다. 나아가 진정 수치한정인지 또는 부진정 수치한정인지에 따라서 기재요건, 진보성, 균등관계, 권리범위확인 사건에서 확인대상발명의 특정, 발명의 동일성 등의 판단에 어떻게 적용되는지를 논의하면서 판결례도 분석해 본다. 특히, 이러한 판결례 분석을 통하여 1) 기재요건에서는 명세서 그 자체로 수치한정발명의 특성을 파악하여 실시가능 요건과 뒷받침 요건을 파악하는 것이 필요하다는 점, 2) 진보성 및 신규성 판단에서는 진정 수치한정인지 부진정 수치한정인지에 따라 진보성 및 신규성이 부정될 여지가 달라진다는 점, 3) 균등관계 판단에서는 해당 수치한정 구성요소를 특허발명의 과제해결원리와 관련하여 고찰한 다음 확인대상발명과의 관계에서 권리범위에 속하는지 규범적으로 판단하는 것이 필요하다는 점을 명확히 하였다. 이 논문에서 논의한 바와 같이 수치한정발명을 진정 수치한정, 부진정 수치한정으로 분류하여 그 특성을 적용하는 것이 실무적 및 이론적으로 조금이나마 참고가 되기를 기대한다.

흙의 비배수전단강도가 0이 되는 함수비인 흐름한계의 제안

박성식,농쩐쩐 한국지반공학회 2013 한국지반공학회논문집 Vol.29 No.11

When a slope failure or a debris flow occurs, a shear strength on failure plane becomes nearly zero and soil beginsto flow like a non-cohesive liquid. A consistency of cohesive soils changes as a water content increases. Even a cohesivesoil existing at liquid limit state has a small amount of shear strength. In this study, a water content, at which a shearstrength of cohesive soils is zero and then cohesive soils will start to flow, was proposed. Three types of clays (kaolinite,bentonite and kaolinite (50%)+bentonite (50%)) were mixed with three different solutions (distilled water, sea waterand microbial solution) at liquid limit state and then their water contents were increased step by step. Then, theirundrained shear strength was measured using a portable vane shear device called Torvane. The ranges of undrainedshear strength at liquid and plastic limits are 3.6-9.2 kPa and 24-45 kPa, respectively. On the other hand, the watercontent that corresponds to the value of the undrained shear strength changing most rapidly is called flow water content. The flow limit refers to the water content when undrained shear strength of cohesive soils is zero. In order to investigatethe relationship between liquid limit and flow limit, the cohesive index was defined as a value of the difference betweenflow limit and liquid limit. The new plasticity index was defined as the value of difference between flow limit andplastic limit. The new liquidity index was also defined using flow limit. The values of flow limit are 1.5-2 times higherthan those of liquid limit. At the same time, the values of new plasticity index are 2-5.5 times higher than those oforiginal plasticity index.

국회의원 임기 제한에 관한 연구

문재완 한국공법학회 2018 공법연구 Vol.46 No.3

This paper argues for the imposition of term limits upon members of the National Assembly. Though the Constitution of Korea articulates that the President shall not be reelected after five-year period of a term, it does not express anything on term limits on members of the National Assembly but four-year period of a term. A comparative study on experiences of the United States of America will be much helpful to design term limits for the National Assembly. The idea of term limits has been popular in the United States since the Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation, under which terms limits kept representatives to three terms in any six-year period. Though term limits were not included in the Constitution of the United States, there are still lots of strong advocates for term limits. 15 states have term limit restrictions on their state legislators. The rationale for term limits on members of the National Assembly is the same as the President. Power without term limits shall corrupt. Academic studies show that senior members, who have been elected more than twice, have enormous powers in controlling other members in the legislative process. In Korea, cross voting is extremely rare and members used to follow decisions of the political party they belong to. Therefore, deliberation before voting disappears. To restore deliberative democracy reformation is needed in our political system. Term limits upon members might be an effective way to change the political culture. A bill was introduced in the National Assembly on November 21, 2017 to impose a term limit upon senior members. According to the bill, members who have elected more than three times in the same election district are not eligible to run in the same district. As it is less restrictive than any other imaginable way among term limits, it is not unconstitutional. Rotation in office in the legislative body by adopting term limits would provide a useful check on the powers of career members. The National Assembly will be composed of professional politicians and the people who are good at deliberation. 국회의원의 동일 지역구 4연임을 제한하는 법률안이 국회에 계류 중이다. 본 논문은 국회의원 연임 제한의 정당성과 연임 제한 법률안의 위헌성을 종합적으로 검토한다. 분석의 깊이를 더 하기 위하여 의원 임기 제한을 실시하고 있는 미국에서의 논의를 비교법적으로 검토한다. 의원 임기 제한의 주장은 우리나라에서 낯설지만, 민주주의 역사에서 보면 새로운 것이 아니다. 의원 임기 제한은 공직 순환근무의 이상과 역사적 경험에 뿌리를 두고 있다. 공직 순환근무는 그리스ㆍ로마 시대에서 시작되어, 르네상스 시대 베니스와 피렌체에서 발전한 후 미국에서 실현되었다. 의원 임기 제한은 미국 연합헌장에 명시되었고, 독립선언서를 작성한 토마스 제퍼슨이 역설하였으며, 1990년대 시민운동으로 활발하게 실현되었다. 지금도 미국 15개 주에서 주의원 임기 제한이 실시되고 있다. 의원 임기제한의 정당성은 대통령 임기 제한과 마찬가지로 권력남용의 우려에 있다. 의회는 의원으로 구성된 합의제 기관이기 때문에 의원의 권력남용은 의회의 기능 훼손으로 나타난다. 우리나라 국회의 경우 심의 또는 숙의 없이 집권당의 당론에 따라 독단적으로 안건이 처리되거나, 소수당의 당론에 따른 저항으로 의사결정이 지연되는 일이 다반사로 발생한다. 다선 의원은 당론 결정에 적지 않은 영향을 미치기 때문에 국회 기능 훼손에 상당한 책임이 있다고 보아야 한다. 더구나 다선 의원의 의정활동에 대한 평가는 높지 않다. 다선 의원은 국회에서 심의 또는 숙의하는 과정보다 당내 헤게모니 장악이나 지역구 관리에 더 신경 쓴다. 의원 임기 제한으로 공직 순환근무가 실현되면 국민의 대표를 직업으로 여기는 사람이 아니라, 국민과 소통할 수 있는 사람이 대표가 될 수 있는 기회를 얻는다. 그렇게 될 때 대의기관인 국회는 숙의민주주의를 실현할 수 있다. 의원 임기 제한의 방식은 평생 재직기간을 누적하여 제한하는 방식과 연속 재직기간을 제한하는 방식이 있다. 현재 국회에 계류 중인 안은 동일한 지역구에서 4연임을 제한하는 내용으로 느슨한 형태의 임기 제한 방식이다. 입법되더라도 동일한 지역구에서 12년까지 의원으로 활동할 수 있고 다른 지역구국회의원 또는 비례대표국회의원으로 선출될 수 있기 때문에 공무담임권의 제약 정도는 미약한 반면 정치 신인의 국회 진출을 제고하고 당론 정치를 배척하고 국회의 심의 내지 숙의 기능을 강화함으로써 국회가 본연의 기능을 수행하도록 하는 공익적 가치가 크다고 본다.

Development of the Speed Limit Model for Harbour and Waterway(II) - The Method of Speed Limit Decision and Application -

Kim, Deug-Bong,An, Kwang The Korean Society of Marine Environment and safet 2015 해양환경안전학회지 Vol.21 No.3

This research is the result on calculating the logical speed limit through certain process which some elements must be considered on selecting the speed limit of harbour and waterway. The suggested speed limit select model on this research is processed from 1~6 steps by forming a professional group of experts. Each step has its information which 1st step(water division), 2nd step(selecting the model vessel and vessel applied with speed limit.), 3rd step(selecting the maximum and minimum speed range on each section), 4th step(evaluation on the safeness of traffic), 5th step(suggesting the appropriate speed limit), 6th step(execution and evaluation.). The appropriate speed limit was decided on consideration of the safety of maritime traffic on the range of the maximum speed and the minimum speed. This model was used to derive the appropriate speed limit on the harbour water and Busan harbour entrance waterway. As the result, the harbour water was calculated to be 6.9 knots, the appropriate speed limit of Busan entrance harbour was 9.3 knots. The present calculation of the speed limit on the approaching channel area is 10 knots, inner harbour area is 7 knots, which are similar to the result of the speed limit. This research is the first research on selecting the speed limit model and has its limits on finding the perfect speed limit result. More detailed standards on the safeness of traffic evaluation must be found and additional study is necessary on discriminating consideration of the elements. This research has its value which it provides instances of aboard cases on guidelines of selecting the speed limit.

예금채권의 소멸시효 및 위법행위와 손해 사이의 인과관계 ― 대법원 2022. 4. 28. 선고 2020다268265 판결의 검토 ―

이승현 연세대학교 법학연구원 2024 법학연구 Vol.34 No.1

The Supreme Court decision 2020da268265 issued on April 28, 2022 involved a case where the plaintiff deposited a cashier's check in the plaintiff's name with the defendant (National Credit Union Federation of Korea) through an agent (his mistress). The money was illegally withdrawn by the agent and an employee of the defendant. The plaintiff made a main claim against the defendant for a refund of the deposit and a preliminary claim for indemnification based on the employer's liability. In the case here, the issue was whether a deposit claim is subject to the statute of limitations and if so, what the period of the statute of limitations is; whether the statute of limitations should be considered suspended if the bank pays an interest on the deposit because the payment of interest constitutes an acknowledgment of the debt; whether the defendant's argument that the plaintiff's claim of deposit refund has been extinguished by prescription does not conform to the principle of good faith; whether the plaintiff suffered a “loss” from not being able to properly exercise its claim on the bank deposit against the defendant due to the tort of the defendant’s employee; on the theory that the plaintiff suffered a “loss” when the plaintiff’s claim against the defendant regarding the bank deposit claim is extinguished after the statute of limitations has expired, whether a proximate causal relation between the loss and the tort of the defendant’s employee is recognized. Regarding this question, it was held in the Supreme Court decision 2020da268265 issued on April 28, 2022 that a savings account deposit is subject to the statute of limitations, but the bank’s payment of the interest on the deposit tolled the statute of limitations. The court found a proximate causal relation between the tort of the defendant's employee and the loss suffered by the plaintiff. In this paper, in order to determine the validity of the Supreme Court decision 2020da268265 issued in April 28, 2022, I conducted the research in the following sequence. First, I reviewed whether the statute of limitations applies to the plaintiff's claim on the deposit; and if the statute of limitations applies, whether the plaintiff's act of making a deposit constitutes an ancillary commercial act and a 5-year commercial statute of limitations applies to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant; whether the fact that the bank paid an interest to the plaintiff constitutes an acknowledgment of the debt and tolls the statute of limitations. Second, in order to examine whether the defendant's argument that the plaintiff's deposit claim against the defendant was extinguished by prescription contravenes the principle of good faith, I examined precedents which addressed the issue of whether a defense based on the statute of limitations violates the principle of good faith and sought to identify the legal reasoning in the precedents related to this issue. Third, in order to explore whether a proximate causal relation is recognized between the expiration of the statute of limitations on the plaintiff's deposit claim and the tort of the defendant's employee, I reflected on whether a loss can be recognized because the plaintiff was not able to properly exercise the deposit claim against the defendant, and if a loss is recognized, whether a proximate causal relation with the tort of the defendant's employee could be recognized.

공소시효 관련 법률 개정의 현황과 문제점

서효원(Seo Hyo Won) 한국형사소송법학회 2016 형사소송 이론과 실무 Vol.8 No.2

Statutes of limitations (in criminal codes) are laws that extinguish the state’s power to prosecute criminals when specified periods of time have passed after committing crimes. Korean Criminal Procedure Act also introduces the statute of limitations law under Article 249 Paragraph 1. It is justified by the reasons that willingness of the society and the victims to punish criminals decreases as time goes by; there is possibilities that criminals’ antisociality may be reformed; evidences are scattered and lost. Thus, these necessities of statutes of limitations should be considered when making new exceptions for the statutes of limitations. The exceptions for the statutes of limitations on the Korean Criminal Procedure Act and other special laws have been revised several times. Revision of the Criminal Procedure Act in 2007 extended limitation periods in a lump; other revisions include extending limitation periods of the sexual violence crimes by 10 years when scientific evidences, such as DNA, exist, suspending the limitation periods until the victim of sexual violence crime or abuse crime reaches one’s full age if the victim is a child when the crime is committed, and excluding limitations for sexual violence crimes to minors under 13 or disabled people and murders. However, since exceptions of the limitations are the result of balancing legal stability and punishment of criminals, they should not be the emotional response to specific crimes, Exceptions can only be justified when there are reasons, of substantive and procedural laws, which decrease the necessity of statutes of limitations thus enough to extend, suspend, or exclude the limitations. Therefore, statutes of limitations should only be excluded for the crimes against humanity; for the minor crimes, the limitations could only be suspended or extended, not excluded, after considering whether the reasons to make exceptions for the limitations, such as obstructions to prosecute criminals, exist. In this viewpoint, current acts and bills proposed to the National Assembly exclude statutes of limitations for excessively many crimes. It needs to be seriously considered, referring examples of other countries, that problems related to the state crimes or crimes whose limitation period is soon-to-be expired, should be solved by the suspension or extension of limitations.