공정거래법상 동의의결 절차에 있어서 ‘이행관리제도’의 체계상 지위와 실효적 운영을 위한 보완 방안
The systematic status of the ‘implementation management system’ in the procedure of consent decree under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act and its effective operation method
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The consent decree has raised a fundamental question about whether the system can be effective in the enforcement of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (MRFTA) since its introduction. Also, as the system has been implemented for ten years, the assessment for its pros and cons have become more apparent, and the revitalization of the system has been constantly discussed. On the other hand, such assessment for the consent decree has been made not only because of its nature but also of the expansion of skeptical views on the system due to poor implementation management. In fact, existing discussions relating to the system focused mainly on specific steps, including ‘whether or not to initiate the procedure’ or ‘confirmation of the consent decree resolution’ in the procedure of the system. As a result, despite negative views on the effectiveness of the implementation or the effectiveness of the inspection after the consent decree is finalized, it is true that the content related to ‘implementation management’ was either excluded from the discussion itself or treated passively. Looking back critically at such existing situation, ‘implementation management of consent decree’ should be considered to be encompassed in light of nature of the consent decree. The procedures of the implementation management may not be understood as a separate process different from series of steps leading to the confirmation of the proposed consent decree. In April 2021, the partial amendments to the MRFTA was passed by the National Assembly in order to enhance the reliability and transparency of the overall case handling procedure, including investigation and deliberation, as well as to strengthen the due process of Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) investigation. This article reviews the regulation related to the ‘implementation management system of consent decree’ introduced as KFTC can entrust the management task to the Korea Fair Trade Mediation Agency (KOFAIR) and Korea Consumer Agency (KCA), and then suggests the substantive and procedural supplementary measures.
Abstract
The consent decree has raised a fundamental question about whether the system can be effective in the enforcement of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (MRFTA) since its introduction. Also, as the system has been implemented for ten years, the assessment for its pros and cons have become more apparent, and the revitalization of the system has been constantly discussed. On the other hand, such assessment for the consent decree has been made not only because of its nature but also of the expansion of skeptical views on the system due to poor implementation management. In fact, existing discussions relating to the system focused mainly on specific steps, including ‘whether or not to initiate the procedure’ or ‘confirmation of the consent decree resolution’ in the procedure of the system. As a result, despite negative views on the effectiveness of the implementation or the effectiveness of the inspection after the consent decree is finalized, it is true that the content related to ‘implementation management’ was either excluded from the discussion itself or treated passively. Looking back critically at such existing situation, ‘implementation management of consent decree’ should be considered to be encompassed in light of nature of the consent decree. The procedures of the implementation management may not be understood as a separate process different from series of steps leading to the confirmation of the proposed consent decree. In April 2021, the partial amendments to the MRFTA was passed by the National Assembly in order to enhance the reliability and transparency of the overall case handling procedure, including investigation and deliberation, as well as to strengthen the due process of Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) investigation. This article reviews the regulation related to the ‘implementation management system of consent decree’ introduced as KFTC can entrust the management task to the Korea Fair Trade Mediation Agency (KOFAIR) and Korea Consumer Agency (KCA), and then suggests the substantive and procedural supplementary measures.
참고문헌 (23)
- 권오승, "독점규제법-이론과 실무" (2020), 법문사
- 김동희, "행정법 Ⅰ" (2018), 박영사
- 김형배, "공정거래법의 이론과 실제" (2019), 삼일
- 신동권, "독점규제법 경제법 Ⅰ" (2020), 박영사
- 이봉의, "공정거래법" (2022), 박영사
- 홍명수, "경제법론 Ⅰ" (2008), 경인문화사
- 김근성, "동의의결 절차 및 이행관리이 향후 발전방안", 제2세션 토론문(미공간), 공정거래위원회․공정거래조정원, 2021.12.10., 103~105 (2021)
- 박세환, "혁신으로 인한 결과물의 경쟁사업자와의 공유문제 - 경쟁당국의 적절한 동의의결 결정이란 -", 비교사법, 28(1), pp.513~555 (2021), 한국사법학회[DOI]
- 박세환, "동의의결 절차 및 이행관리이 향후 발전방안", 제2세션 토론문(미공간), 공정거래위원회․공정거래조정원, 2021.12.10, 91~94 (2021)
- 박준영, "공정거래법상 동의의결 이행관리 제도에 관한 연구", 공정거래정책연구, 2021(1) (2021), 한국공정거래조정원
- 박혜림, "동의의결의 법적 성격에 대한 고찰", 서울법학, 22(3), pp.365~404 (2015), 서울시립대학교 법학연구소[DOI]
- 송태원, "동의의결제 실무운용례에 대한 법적 검토", 법제, 2016(1) (2016), 법제처
- 유영국, "동의의결 이행관리 제도의 도입과 그 실효적 운용 방안에 관하여", 한국경쟁법학회 2020년 추계학술대회 토론문 (2020)
- 유진희, "공정거래법상 동의의결 제도의 내용과 문제점 검토", 고려법학, (64), pp.367~399 (2012), 법학연구원
- 동의의결제도의 문제점과 입법과제, "이건묵", 국회입법조사처, ~, pp.NARS 현안보고서 제237호 (2014)
- 이봉의, "공정거래법상 동의의결제의 주요 쟁점과 개선방안", 경쟁과 법, (6) (2016), 서울대 경쟁법센터
- 이봉의, "독점규제법상 경제적 제재의 체계적 조망 - 부당이득환수의 관점에서 -", 경쟁법연구, 26, pp.105~129 (2012), 한국경쟁법학회
- 정중원, "공정거래법상 동의명령제도 도입에 관한 법적 고찰", 고려법학, (54), pp.283~321 (2009), 법학연구원
- 최승재, "동의의결제 입법이후 적용사례로 본 입법상 보완필요성", 인권과 정의, (447), pp.120~137 (2015), 대한변호사협회[DOI]
- 황태희, "공정거래법제에 있어서의 동의의결 활성화 방안", 경쟁법연구, 44, pp.98~121 (2021), 한국경쟁법학회[DOI]
- 홍준형, "공정거래법상 동의명령제 도입방안에 대한 연구", 기업법연구, 21(4), pp.86~114 (2007), 한국기업법학회
- 행정기본법 주요 쟁점 중 공법상 계약 분야 조사․검토 연구, "최승필", 한국외대 산학협력단, ~ (2020)
- 한국공정거래조정원, "동의의결이행관리 업무 매뉴얼 (안)", ~ (2021)
