미국 디스커버리 법제상 보존의무의 소멸 시점에 관한 연구

U.S.-style discovery continues to attract attention in Korean civil procedure law circles. As a reflection of this, the Supreme Court's Judicial Administration Advisory Conference advised in October, 2022, that in order to eliminate the one-sidedness of evidence in civil litigation and to obtain results that match the truth, it is necessary to introduce a discovery system suitable for Korea. In addition, the Supreme Court's Discovery Study Group submitted a report in October, 2022, proposing an amendment to Article 350 of the Korean Code of Civil Procedure to introduce a kind of duty to preserve documents of the parties. However, although there is a legal basis for when the duty to preserve arises, the amendment does not discuss when the duty ceases. Since a party may incur a large cost to fulfill its duty to preserve, it is desirable to legislate the time of its expiration as clearly as possible so that the parties can predict when the duty expires, so that unnecessary costs can be saved. This paper examines the U.S. cases discussing when the duty to preserve expires and argues that when introducing the duty to preserve in Korean civil procedure it is desirable to illustrate when the duty expires to the extent possible. And I propose some examples to consider when the Korean Parliament decides to legislate when the duty to preserve should expire.