This study aims to compare self- and peer-assessments of science-gifted elementary students' scientific creativity. A science-gifted program on the Pascal's principle was implemented to 40 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center for two weeks. After that, students presented their results from a scientific creativity task using the principle in class. The task was to devise a new and useful tool using the principle, and it included the students' self-assessment about their idea. During presentation, students were asked to assess the works of peers and write down the reasons that they gave the scores they gave. Shortly, student self- and peer-assessments about students' scientific creativity outcomes were compared. Based on two essential components of creativity, ideas that satisfy both originality and usefulness can be counted as scientifically creative. The main results of this study are as follows: First, the average scores of student self- and peer-assessments were 71.5 and 61.9. Second, the standard deviations of student self- and peer-assessments were 14.47 and 5.79. Third, among scientific creativity, originality, usefulness scores, only originality had a significant correlation between student self- and peer-assessment (r=.42). Fourth, the students were categorized into four groups according to the levels of their scores by student self- and peer-assessment. And the frequencies of peer-assessment group had a significant difference at p<0.05 level, according to self-assessment group (Chi Square=4.0000, df=1, p=0.0455). Fifth, through a case study by group, the results suggesting that self-assessment could be affected by the students' self-efficacy and perfectionism and such effect could also influence peer-assessment have been found. The result showed that how the student self- and peer-assessment of scientific creativity are different and what the students' thoughts on the evaluation of scientific creativity are. The findings suggested that there are several things to consider for the educators to make efforts to construct consistent assessment methods for scientific creativity.