공정거래위원회 플랫폼규제법안의 문제점
A Critical Review of the Online Platform Regulation Bill in South Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
온라인 플랫폼 시장은 이커머스 외에도 인공지능(AI), 반도체, 모빌리티, 디지털 헬스케어 등 여러 분야에 걸쳐 있고, 어떤 시장보다도 복잡하고 역동적이므로, 독과점 또는 시장지배력과 관련해서는 폐해에 대한 피상적 이론이 아니라 현실의 객관적 증거에 근거하여 신중한 고려를 거쳐 규제가 이루어져야 한다. 그런데 2023년 12월 공정거래위원회(‘공정위’)는 「(가칭)플랫폼 경쟁촉진법」을 추진한다고 밝히면서, 독점규제 및 공정거래에 관한 법률(‘독점규제법’)로는 플랫폼 독과점 폐해 규제가 어려워 규제 대상 사업자를 미리 정하고, 자사우대, 멀티호밍 제한 등 반칙행위에 대해서는 법률로 경쟁제한성·위법성을 추정하겠다고 하였다. 그러나 플랫폼 여부를 불문하고 경쟁보호를 목적으로 하는 경쟁법상 합리의 원칙에 따르면, 자사우대 등 공정위가 반칙행위라고 칭한 행위의 경쟁제한성은 침익적 행정처분을 하려는 공정위가 증명해야 하며, 플랫폼 시장에서 티핑(Tipping) 가설을 고려하더라도 사업자에게 경쟁제한성 없음을 증명하라고 할 수 없다. 합리의 원칙을 형해화시키는 플랫폼경쟁촉진법안은 그 이름과 달리 경쟁을 왜곡할 위험이 크다. EU와 독일 등 해외 플랫폼 규제입법 배경은 한국 실정과 다르므로, 비판적 검토 없이 외국 플랫폼규제론을 수입하는 것은 부적절하다. 플랫폼 독과점 티핑 가설은 현실에서 검증 대상임에도 불구하고, 공정위가 이러한 가설을 현실처럼 인식하면 잘못된 규제가 나올 수밖에 없고, 규제 오류는 AI 등 여러 분야에 악영향을 미칠 것이다.
Abstract
The online platforms are not confined solely to e-commerce but extends across diverse domains including artificial intelligence (AI), semiconductors, digital healthcare, and mobility. Given the complexities of the platform markets, any regulatory intervention must be approached with objetive evidence rather than speculative theories. In December 2023, the Korean Fair Trade Commission(KFTC) announced that it would make the so-called “Platform Competition Promotion Act” (PCPA) based on the so-called “tipping effect”, which disregards the rule of reason in competition law. Under the PCPA, the KFTC may condemn certain practices, such as the so-called “self-preferencing”, without requiring proof of anticompetitive effects. Regrettably, the KFTC appears to rely excessively on speculative theories on platform monopolies. Despite its name, the PCPA may distort platform competition. The KFTC should deal with issues of platform monopolies with real-world evidence under the rule of reason rather than the dubious tipping theory. Otherwise, developments in not only platform but also related areas such as AI, digital healthcare, and mobility would be impaired by the KFTC’s misguided regulation.
참고문헌 (59)
- 이봉의, "공정거래법상 온라인 플랫폼의 자사우대" (2023), 박영사
- 주진열, "독점규제법상 시장지배적 사업자 개념과 관련 문제", 경쟁법연구, 33 (2016), 한국경쟁법학회
- 주진열, "온라인 플랫폼 사업자의 관련시장과 시장지배력 판단기준에 대한 고찰", 선진상사법률연구, 통권 : 101 (2023), 법무부
- 주진열, "플랫폼기업결합 규제론에 대한 고찰 - 데이터독점론과 킬러인수론을 중심으로", 경쟁법연구, 46 (2022), 한국경쟁법학회
- Armentano, D. T., "The Myths of Antitrust" (1972), Alington House
- Armstrong, Mark, "Two-sided markets, competitive bottlenecks and exclusive contracts", Economic Theory, 32 (2007)
- Bork, Robert H., "What Does the Chicago School Teach About Internet Search and the Antitrust Treatment of Google?", Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 8(4) (2012)
- "Platform Neutrality: Hipster Antitrust or Logical Next Step? (Part I)" (2017)[URL]
- "Working Paper – The Market Power of Platforms and Networks" (2016)[URL]
- "Proceedings against large digital companies - on the basis of Sec. 19a GWB" (2023)[URL]
- "Bundeskartellamt prohibits Facebook from combining user data from different sources" (2019)[URL]
- Chander, Anumpam, "The Myth of Platform Neutrality", Georgetown Law Technology Review, 2 (2018)
- "Preventing the Politicization of Antitrust Enforcement" (2019)[URL]
- Chin, Andrew, "Antitrust By Chance: A Unified Theory of Horizontal Merger Doctrine", Yale L.J, 106 (1997)
- Colomo, Pablo Ibanez, "Self-Preferencing: Yet Another Epithet in Need of Limiting Principles", World Competition, 43(4) (2020)
- Crane, Daniel A., "Search Neutrality as an Antitrust Principle", Geo. Mason L. Rev, 19(5) (2012)
- "EU needs its own GAFAs–report" (2016)[URL]
- Dubé, Jean-Pierre H., "Tipping and Concentration in Markets with Indirect Network Effects", Marketing Science, 29(2) (2020)
- Dunne, Niamh, "Competition Law and Economic Regulation" (2015), Cambridge University Press
- "Beware of Populist Antitrust Law" (2019)[URL]
- "The Digital Markets Act"[URL]
- "European Paliament - Briefing EPRS Ideas Paper - Digital sovereignty for Europe"[URL]
- "Scale-up Europe Spurs Collective Action to Accelerate European Tech" (2022)[URL]
- "The Misguided Antitrust Attack on Big Tech" (2020)[URL]
- "Digital Sovereignty and Tight Regulation in the EU: Analysing the motivation behind the Digital Markets Act" (2022)[URL]
- "Draft German competition rules on powerful digital gatekeepers" (2020)[URL]
- Hoffman, Bruce, "Self-Preferencing and Antitrust: Hamful Solutions for An Improbable Problem", CPI Antitrust Chronicle, ~ (2021)
- Hökelekli, Gizem, "Private Label Line Proliferation and PrivateLabel Tier Pricing: A New Dimension of Competition Between Private Labels and National Brands", Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 36 (2017)
- "Antitrust’s New Mission: Preserving Democracy, Not Efficiency" (2021)[URL]
- Jullien, Bruno, "The Economics of Platforms: A Theory Guide for Competition Policy", Information Economics and Policy, 54 (2021)
- Khan, Lina, "Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox", Yale Law Journal, 126(3), pp.564~ (2017)
- Khan, Lina, "The New Brandeis Movement: America’s Antimonopoly Debate", Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 9(3) (2018)
- Klobuchar, Amy, "Antitrust: Taking on Monopoly Power from the Gilded Age to the Digital Age" (2021), Knopf
- Krämera, Jan, "Is there a need for platform neutrality regulation in the EU?", Telecommunications Policy, 42(7) (2018)
- Mann, Geoffrey A., "If Search Neutrality is the Answer, What’s the Question?", ICLE Antitrust & Consumer Protection Program White Paper Series, ~ (2011)
- Page, William H., "The Microsoft Case: Antitrust, High Technology, and Consumer Welfare" (2007), The University of Chicago Press
- "A Simple Way to Measure Tipping in Digital Markets" (2021)[URL]
- Pitofsky, Robert, "The Political Content of Antitrust", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 127, pp.1051~ (1979)
- Portuese, Aurelien, "“Please, Help Yourself”: Toward a Taxonomy of Self-Preferencing", Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, ~ (2021)
- Quelch, John, "Brands Versus Private Labels: Fighting to Win", Harvard Business Review (1996)
- "Google’s Anti-Competitive Search Manipulation Practices: A Timeline of the European Commission, U.S. FTC, DOJ, and State AG Antitrust Probes, Prohibition Decisions & Lawsuits" (2015)[URL]
- "Digital Economy: Should the DMA be the model for competition regulation?" (2024)[URL]
- "Raymond Lonergan in Mr. Justice Brandeis, Great American", ~ (1941)
- "Referentenentwurf des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Energie Entwurf eines Neunten Gesetzes zur Änderung des Gesetzes gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen (9. GWB-ÄndG)", ~
- Antitrust, Regulation, and the Neutrality Trap: A plea for smart, evidence-basedInternet policy, "Renda, Andrea", CEPS, ~, pp.CEPS Report No. 104 (2015)
- "Facebook Loses Antitrust Decision in Germany Over Data Collection" (2020)[URL]
- Sokol, Daniel, "Antitrust and Regulating Big Data", George Mason Law Review, 23, pp.119~ (2016)
- Stapp, Alec, "The Ghosts of Antitrust Past: What the IBM-AT&T-Microsoft Trilogy Can Teach Us About Calls to Break Up Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple", ICLE Antitrust & Consumer Protection Research Program Issue Brief, ~ (2020)
- Srnicek, Nick, "Platform Capitalism (Theory Redux)" (2016)
- Sullivan, E. Thomas, "The Political Economy of the Sherman Act" (1991), Oxford University Press
- "Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets" (2020)[URL]
- Tucker, Darren S., "Big Mistakes Regarding Big Data", Antitrust Source, ~ (2014)
- "Europe’s demands on Google mount" (2014)[URL]
- "Obama accuses EU of attacking American tech companies because it ‘can't compete’" (2015)[URL]
- Viscusi, W. Kip, "Economics of Regulation and Antitrust" (2000), The MIT Press
- "How Walmart and Target are using private-label and physical stores to fightback against Amazon" (2019)[URL]
- Wright, Joshua D., "Requiem for a Paradox: The Dubious Rise and Inevitable Fall of Hipster Antitrust", Arizona State Law Journal, 51, pp.293~ (2019)
- Wu, Tim, "The Curse of Bigness: Antitrust in the New Gilded Age" (2018), Columbia Global Report
- "The Utah Statement: Reviving Antimonopoly Traditions for the Era of Big Tech" (2019)[URL]