공정거래법 개정안의 쟁점과 평가 -사적집행체계의 강화를 중심으로-

Abstract

The Korea Fair Trade Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “KFTC”) drafted a Proposal for General Revision of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, followed by an advance notice of legislation on August 24, 2018. The proposal is aimed at incorporating into the Act the changes in the economic environment and the pressing needs to achieve a fair economy and innovation-driven growth. The proposal was prepared based on the discussions at a “special committee” comprised of experts from the private sector, and reflects the opinions from stakeholders as identified through discussions with the academia, the National Assembly, and businesses. In particular, the amendment is a significant feature of improving the private enforcement system, which mainly includes the Right of Injunction Request by Private Person, in order to improve law enforcement practices, which have been overly publicly enforced. There have been many discussions for the introduction of the prohibition of signing, and it is somewhat unfortunate that the amendment was enacted according to the contents of the Japanese antitrust laws. But It is understandable that we refer to legislation similar to our legal system. As there is a voice to question whether an amendment strengthening private enforcement is desirable for our legal system, the system should be used more actively in the future law enforcement process. This paper presents several alternatives for this purpose, and the most important problem is the confusion caused by the disagreement between the court and the KFTC. There is an inevitable aspect at the beginning of the introduction of the system. I believe that the emphasis of private enforcement does not lead to the weakening of public enforcement, and that it is the legislative purpose of the amendment to establish a competitive order through harmonious enforcement of both parties and to provide relief for victims appropriately. This amendment contains much content to ensure the credibility of law enforcement. In particular, it can be evaluated that the amendment that enhances the defense rights of the respondents in the event handling process, and the revision that shortens the disposition of the disposition and reduces the discretion of the case can enhance the transparency of the law enforcement and enhance the credibility of the KFTC. On the other hand, in the course of the investigation, the feeling that the imposition of the compulsory transgression against the refusal to submit the data is somewhat excessive legislation. In addition, recommending members of the KFTC to interest groups such as economic organizations and legal associations is not desirable from the viewpoint of fairness and independence of handling cases. In order to advance law enforcement and ensure efficient enforcement, the amendments that must be introduced need to be flexibly dealt with separately from the content subject to political controversy. I think this amendment will be a leap forward in building an advanced competition law system.