담합의 종기와 관련한 몇 가지 쟁점에 대한 소고 - 계속적 입찰담합, 담합의 탈퇴, 자진신고 관련 쟁점을 중심으로-
A study on the meaning of 'cessation of the infringement' regarding cartel
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In terms of duration, generally, cartel would end where the infringement ceases, or where duration of agreements ends according to case law in Korea. Also similar rule can be applied when it comes to 'a single overall agreement'. In general, this principle will be the same related with 'bid-rigging'. However, in some cases, the cessation of the infringement could be set from the very day upon which agreements has established although practices set out in the agreements still leave. In this sense, recently the Supreme court also confirmed that limitation period for imposition of fines begins to run on the day when a contract related with bidding has finished if there would be no more restrictive effects on competition triggered by the agreements. Furthermore, even during the infringement, a whistle-blower can be regarded as withdrawn from a cartel, and as a result, the infringement of whistle-blower ends. There has not been any clear precedent case law regarding this issue. Recently the Supreme court showed the same opinion as above. From my perspective, the court's view is plausible because it will contribute to legal certainty.
Abstract
In terms of duration, generally, cartel would end where the infringement ceases, or where duration of agreements ends according to case law in Korea. Also similar rule can be applied when it comes to 'a single overall agreement'. In general, this principle will be the same related with 'bid-rigging'. However, in some cases, the cessation of the infringement could be set from the very day upon which agreements has established although practices set out in the agreements still leave. In this sense, recently the Supreme court also confirmed that limitation period for imposition of fines begins to run on the day when a contract related with bidding has finished if there would be no more restrictive effects on competition triggered by the agreements. Furthermore, even during the infringement, a whistle-blower can be regarded as withdrawn from a cartel, and as a result, the infringement of whistle-blower ends. There has not been any clear precedent case law regarding this issue. Recently the Supreme court showed the same opinion as above. From my perspective, the court's view is plausible because it will contribute to legal certainty.
참고문헌 (11)
- 권오승, "경제법" (2015), 법문사
- 이호영, "독점규제법(제5판)" (2015), 홍문사
- 김경란, "독점규제 및 공정거래에 관한 법률 제19조 제1항 제1호의 부당한 공동행위의 종기", 사법, 1(7), pp.181~209 (2009), 사법발전재단
- 김혜경, "형사판례연구 제19호" (2011), 박영사
- 윤성운, "부당한 공동행위 자진신고자 감면제도의 실무 운용상 제문제", 경쟁법연구, 20, pp.263~296 (2009), 한국경쟁법학회
- 정종채, "인권과 정의 제 433호", pp.116~ (2013), 대한변호사협회
- 홍명수, "일본의 동경양수기 사건 판결 검토", 경쟁저널 (2009)
- 황태희, "시장경제와 사회조화: 남천 권오승교수 정년기념논문집", pp.251~270 (2015), 법문사
- Bellamy, "European Union Law of Competition"
- Whish, "Competition Law" (2007)
- "The Commission’s Leniency Notice", ~ (2006)
