과점시장의 규제법리에 관한 연구
A Study on How Effectively to Regulate a Oligopolistic Market with the Competition Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
There are almost no perfectly competitive markets and also few monopolisticmarkets. However a huge number of oligopolistic markets which we have metin the real life may be a very important topic on the competition lawjurisdiction. A core characteristic of the oligopoly, interdependency, has beentold. Therefore oligopolists will make their own decisions considering theircompetitors’ reaction. It is very natural that the market’s interdependencycauses a kind of an equilibrium without any explicit or implicit agreementwhich is also Nash one. The Cournot oligopoly theory may give us a bestunderstanding on the Nash equilibrium. But oligopolists may try to exploittheir consumers more by taking more strategic tactics beyond the equilibrium. We need to fully understand the difference between the oligopolistic Nashequilibrium and strategic behaviours to pursue additional profits up to themonopolistic one. The trigger’s strategy, one of gorgeous game theories,makes us know the strength of the strategy’s incentive. Two legal approaches, a structural approach and a behaviour approach, toregulate the oligopolistic markets have been made. Almost all competitionlaws throughout the world provide some clauses to condemn the abuse ofmarket dominating positions and concerted practices which are considered astwo legal methods to get rid of some detriments caused by oligopolists. Tocondemn oligopolists as a abusive market dominance two elements, collectivemarket dominant position and its abuse, are asked to prove whereas asconcerted practices, their strategic behaviours in the market. Base on the above analysis, we need to make a stress on the difference betweenthe Nash equilibrium and strategic behaviour. While we interpret the relevantlegal methods in the Korean Monopoly Regulation and Fare Trade Act, we need to make sure it.
Abstract
There are almost no perfectly competitive markets and also few monopolisticmarkets. However a huge number of oligopolistic markets which we have metin the real life may be a very important topic on the competition lawjurisdiction. A core characteristic of the oligopoly, interdependency, has beentold. Therefore oligopolists will make their own decisions considering theircompetitors’ reaction. It is very natural that the market’s interdependencycauses a kind of an equilibrium without any explicit or implicit agreementwhich is also Nash one. The Cournot oligopoly theory may give us a bestunderstanding on the Nash equilibrium. But oligopolists may try to exploittheir consumers more by taking more strategic tactics beyond the equilibrium. We need to fully understand the difference between the oligopolistic Nashequilibrium and strategic behaviours to pursue additional profits up to themonopolistic one. The trigger’s strategy, one of gorgeous game theories,makes us know the strength of the strategy’s incentive. Two legal approaches, a structural approach and a behaviour approach, toregulate the oligopolistic markets have been made. Almost all competitionlaws throughout the world provide some clauses to condemn the abuse ofmarket dominating positions and concerted practices which are considered astwo legal methods to get rid of some detriments caused by oligopolists. Tocondemn oligopolists as a abusive market dominance two elements, collectivemarket dominant position and its abuse, are asked to prove whereas asconcerted practices, their strategic behaviours in the market. Base on the above analysis, we need to make a stress on the difference betweenthe Nash equilibrium and strategic behaviour. While we interpret the relevantlegal methods in the Korean Monopoly Regulation and Fare Trade Act, we need to make sure it.
참고문헌 (49)
- 권오승, "경제법" (2005), 법문사
- 김성철, "과점산업의 집중률과 이윤률의 관련성에 관한 실증연구", 국제경제연구, 6(3) (2000)
- 박영철, "과점이론에 대한 고찰", 사회과학논총, 7 (1988)
- 양명조, "경제법강의(제5판)" (2007), 신조사
- 이봉의, "경제적 동일체이론과 공동의 시장지배에 관한 소고", 경제법판례연구, 5 (2009), 법문사
- 이선환, "과점시장의 가격 및 생산량 결정에 관한 소고-휴리스틱 이윤극대화와 수요곡선-", 경제연구, 18(2) (1997)
- 이호영, "경쟁법상 ‘공동의 시장지배력’ 개념에 관한 연구", 법학논총, 26(2), pp.197~228 (2009), 법학연구소
- 이호영, "독점금지법상 ‘합의의 도그마’에 대한 저항-과점기업의 묵시적 사업조정의 규제를 중심으로-", 경쟁법연구, 12 (2005)
- 이효석, "공동의 시장지배와 과점규제 - EU 경쟁법상의 논의와 시사점 -", 법학연구, 52(1), pp.145~170 (2011), 법학연구소
- 전영서, "우리나라 독과점 시장구조에 대한 후생효과 분석", 산업조직연구, 10(1), pp.57~78 (2002), 한국산업조직학회
- 전영서, "통신서비스 시장에서의 사회후생손실에 관한 연구", 경제연구, 25(2) (2004)
- 조병택, "한국산업의 과점화과정에 관한 실증적 연구-1960∼1970년대의 제조업을 중심으로-", 경제연구, 6(1)
- 홍명수, "경제법론Ⅱ" (2010), 경인문화사
- 황치오, "시장지배적 지위(Market Dominant Position) 관련 조항인 유럽연합조약 제82조를 통한 유럽연합(European Union)의 과점규제에 대한 고찰", 저스티스, (105), pp.104~127 (2008), 한국법학원
- A. Negbennegor, "Microeconomics, The Freedom to Choose CAT", ~ (2001)
- ABA, "Antitrust Law Developments" (2007), ABA Publishing
- Areeda&Kaplow, "Antitrust Analysis" (1997), Aspen Law & Business
- Carl Kaysen, "Antitrust Policy : An Economic and Lagel Analysis" (1959), Harvard University Press
- Carl Davidson, "Long-Run Competition in Capacity, Short-Run Competition in Price, and the Cournot Model", Rand J. Econ, 17, pp.404~ (1986)
- Cooter & Ulen, "Law&Economics", pp.38~, Pearson
- David M. Kreps, "Quantity Precommitment and Bertrand Competition Yield Cournot Outcomes", Bell J. Econ, 14, pp.326~ (1983)
- David S. Evans, "Economics and The Design of Competition Law", Issues in Competition Law and Policy, 1
- E. Thomas Sullivan, "Antitrust Law, Policy and Procedure" (1999), Lexis Law Publishing
- Edward H. Chamberlin, "The Theory of Monopolistic Competition", ~ (1948)
- Nathaniel T. Bacon, "English version of the above Cournot’s paper was the one" (1960), Kelley
- Einer Elhauge, "Global Antitrust Law and Economics", pp.2011, Thomson Reuters
- George Symeonidis, "Comparing Cournot and Bertrand Equilibriua in a Differentiated Duopoly with Product R&D", ~
- Gregory J. Werden, "Economic Evidence on the Existence of Collusion: Reconciling Antitrust Law with Oligopoly Theory", Antitrust Law Journal, 71(3) (2004)
- Price Theory and Business Behaviour, "Hall, B.F.", Oxford Economic, ~ (1939)
- Heinrich von Stackelberg, "Marktform und Gleichgewicht" (1934), Julius Springer
- Joan Robinson, "The Economics of Imperfect Competition", ~ (1933)
- Joe S. Bain, "A Note on Pricing in Monopoly and Oligopoly", American Economic Review, 40(2) (1950)
- Joe S. Bain, "Relation of Profit Rate to Industry Concentration", Qu J Ec, 65 (1951)
- John B. Clark, "Substantial Elements of Economic Theory", ~ (2000)
- John Nash, "Equilibrium points in n-person games", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 36(1)
- Joseph Bertrand, "Théorie Mathématique de Richesse Sociale", Journal Des Savants (1883)
- Martin J. Osborne, "Price Competition in a Capacity Constrained Duopoly", J. Econ. Theory, 38, pp.238~ (1986)
- Paul M. Sweezy, "Demand under Conditions of Oligopoly", Journal of Political Economy, 48 (1939)
- Phillip E. Areeda, "Antitrust Law 1400a", ~ (2003)
- Richard Posner, "Antitrust in the New Economy", Antitrust L.J, 68, pp.925~ (2001)
- Richard Posner, "Oligopoly and the Antitrust Laws: A Suggested Approach", Stan. L. Rev, 21, pp.1562~ (1969)
- Richard Whish, "Competition Law" (2012), Oxford University Press
- Robert E. Nielson, "The No-Conduct Approach to Monopoly Power and Its Application to Oligopoly", Valparaiso University Law Review, 15(3) (1981)
- Robert H. Bork, "The Antitrust Paradox" (1993), The Free Press
- "The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics", Palgrave McMillan
- Turner, "The Definition of Agreement under the Sherman Act: Conscious Parallelism and Refusals to Deal", Harv. L. Rev, 75, pp.655~ (1962)
- Turner, "The Scope of Antitrust and Other Economic Regulatory Policies", Harv. L. Rev, 82, pp.1207~ (1969)
- W. Kip Viscusi, "Economics of Regulation and Antitrust" (2005), The MIT Press
- "法と經濟學商事法務", 太田勝造譯, ~ (1997)