2021년 공정거래 주요 판례 회고
Introduction and Comments on 2021 Precedents Focused on Competition law Issues
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The attitude of Korean supreme court in 2021 verdict is characterized as placing emphasis on competition law regulation which is the exception of private autonomy. Ceo’s duty to monitor against cartel in the shareholder’s representative lawsuits, margin squeeze as the abuse of dominant position, the extension of statute of limitation in the Korean FTC’s fine and strict unfairness test in the cartel are all supported by the supreme court. The purpose of Large retail business act and franchise business act are supported when balancing the purpose of making the equal position between the supplier and the large business entity, franchiser and franchisee with the private autonomy. These tendencies show the awareness to economic reality and the direction of interpretation in the Korean supreme court.
Abstract
The attitude of Korean supreme court in 2021 verdict is characterized as placing emphasis on competition law regulation which is the exception of private autonomy. Ceo’s duty to monitor against cartel in the shareholder’s representative lawsuits, margin squeeze as the abuse of dominant position, the extension of statute of limitation in the Korean FTC’s fine and strict unfairness test in the cartel are all supported by the supreme court. The purpose of Large retail business act and franchise business act are supported when balancing the purpose of making the equal position between the supplier and the large business entity, franchiser and franchisee with the private autonomy. These tendencies show the awareness to economic reality and the direction of interpretation in the Korean supreme court.
참고문헌 (18)
- 권오승, "독점규제법"
- 송옥렬, "상법강의" (2020), 법문사
- 이철송, "회사법강의" (2020), 박영사
- 정호열, "경제법" (2010)
- 한수웅, "헌법학"
- 박은정, "가맹거래계약관계와 노동법", 월간 노동리뷰 (2015)
- 최영홍, "대규모유통업법의 입법취지와 적용 범위", 기업법연구, 30(3), pp.249~269 (2016), 한국기업법학회
- 손영화, "일본법상 내부통제의 개시에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 18(3), pp.1~49 (2010), 법학연구소
- 이봉의, "공정거래법상 ‘카르텔’의 부당성 판단", 사법, 1(2), pp.117~148 (2007), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- 이봉의, "이윤압착을 통한 배제남용의 법리: 독일, 유럽의 경쟁법을 중심으로", 특별법연구, 17 (2020), 사법발전재단
- 이승택, "우리 공정거래법상 부당성의 의미 및 그 법률상 지위", 사법논집 (2009)
- 이호영, "이윤압착행위에 대한 공정거래법의 적용에 관한 연구", 법경제학연구, 16(3), pp.335~364 (2019), 한국법경제학회[DOI]
- 하종대, "대법원판례해설(치과의사회 사건, 대법원 2005. 8. 19. 2003두9251 판결)" (2005)
- 한수웅, "헌법학"
- 황태희, "부당한 공동행위의 위법성 판단기준에 관한 연구", 특별법연구 (2011)
- 황태희, "시장지배적 사업자의 이윤압착 행위의 부당성 판단", 사법, 1(38), pp.699~734 (2016), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- E. Thomas Sullivan, "Antitrust Law, Policy and Procedure:Cases, Materials, Problems"
- Areeda, Hovenkamp, "Antitrust Law"