공정거래분야에 있어서 조정제도의 현황과 개선방안

Abstract

It has been assumed that mediation system could be applied better to the fields, in which the compromise plans by negotiation would be appropriate, or to the fields such as environmental disputes or public policy-related disputes that would require lots of cost and time than to the disputes among family members or the fields required for legal judgments or forced conclusions. In addition, it is advantageous in terms that it could efficiently and effectively deal with the disputes based on sophisticated professional knowledge that may be hardly understood by judges or the disputes related to the secrets of companies. Furthermore, mediation system does not require the aid of lawyers in its procedures so that it may resolve the disputes within 2 to 3 months of relatively short period of time as well as lower or eliminate pertinent costs. Owing to its strengths, it has been used in various fields of the court other than its mediation by attaching it legal procedures and it has tended to be applied in a variety of fields in the countries around the world. In the revised Fair Trade Act (July 3, 2007), mediation system was introduced in ‘the field of unfair trade.' Most cases concerning unfair trade practices reported to Fair Trade Commission have been characterized by private disputes and most reporters have tended to want a remedy for violation of their private rights rather than a strict punishment on harmers. Therefore, it would be significant in that the resolution through mediation in these fields puts priority on the remedy for the victims of unfair trade and provides the harmers with an opportunity to correct their faults on their own. In this regard, this study investigated actual current conditions and problems of 'the dispute resolution system' introduced in fair trade and offered several suggestions for the activation of its use. First of all, in order to activate the mediation system in ordinary fields as well as fair trade fields, equivalent effectiveness with ‘settlement in court’ should be given to mediation. The study described concrete grounds for this in detail. Moreover, it suggested a method of ensuring the neutrality and fairness of mediation system. It is no exaggeration to say that the core element of mediation system is to secure the neutrality and fairness. Accordingly, it should be established in the groups or organizations ensured with fairness and neutrality. Lastly, it has been believed that the method of endowing 'the effectiveness of suspension in extinctive prescription during the application of mediation’ would also contribute largely to the activation of mediation system.