방송·통신 서비스의 결합판매에 대한 경쟁법적 검토 - 끼워팔기 법리를 중심으로 -
A legal research on the unlawful bundling between telecommunication and broadcasting services-focused on the tying arrangements in terms of the competition law
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Bundlings of broadcasting and telecommunications services are common among the operators. In the current Telecommunications Business Act, the Broadcasting Act and Internet Multimedia Broadcasting Act prohibit the unlawful bundling, which undermines the benefit of users, or discriminates users. On the other hand, KCC determines the standard of the ‘user interests’ where the issue relates the anti-competitiveness such as the leveraging of market power. Theoretically such regulatory practice is not appropriate. Moreover the illegal bundling that forces consumers to buy, or make the bundled product market uncompetitive effects may be regulated as ‘tying’ in terms of the competition law. Thus, if the bundling which hinders the interests of users should KCC regulate actively. But through the related bundling give rise to competition issues,such as the abuse of the market power, KFTC can prohibit as illegal tying. However, in this case, conflicts of the regulatory power and competition agencies can cause problems of competence. I think it is inevitable unless the enforcement of the regulatory authority bases on a general theory of competition.
Abstract
Bundlings of broadcasting and telecommunications services are common among the operators. In the current Telecommunications Business Act, the Broadcasting Act and Internet Multimedia Broadcasting Act prohibit the unlawful bundling, which undermines the benefit of users, or discriminates users. On the other hand, KCC determines the standard of the ‘user interests’ where the issue relates the anti-competitiveness such as the leveraging of market power. Theoretically such regulatory practice is not appropriate. Moreover the illegal bundling that forces consumers to buy, or make the bundled product market uncompetitive effects may be regulated as ‘tying’ in terms of the competition law. Thus, if the bundling which hinders the interests of users should KCC regulate actively. But through the related bundling give rise to competition issues,such as the abuse of the market power, KFTC can prohibit as illegal tying. However, in this case, conflicts of the regulatory power and competition agencies can cause problems of competence. I think it is inevitable unless the enforcement of the regulatory authority bases on a general theory of competition.
참고문헌 (38)
- 권오승, "독점규제법 30년" (2011), 법문사
- 신현윤, "경제법(제5전정판)" (2012), 법문사
- 유진희, "경제법(제9판)" (2012), 세창출판사
- 이호영, "독점규제법(3판)" (2013), 홍문사
- 임영철, "공정거래법(개정판)" (2008), 법문사
- 김원식, "초고속인터넷과 유료TV방송의 결합판매 경쟁 분석: 경쟁요소와 규제의 영향", 방송통신연구, (73), pp.119~146 (2011), 한국방송학회
- 김희경, "방송통신 서비스 결합판매와 경쟁제한성 연구: 결합판매 효과에 대한 이론적 논쟁과 판례를 중심으로", 한국방송학보, 25(6), pp.254~295 (2011), 한국방송학회
- 이봉의, "독점적 사업자의 끼워팔기 : 마이크로소프트사(MS)의 지위남용을 중심으로", 법과사회, (27), pp.331~369 (2004), 법과사회이론학회
- 이봉의, "방송·통신 결합판매의 규제: 쟁점과 개선방안", 경제규제와 법, 5(1), pp.189~201 (2012), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 이봉의, "독점규제법 제3조의2 제1항 제5호 후단 “소비자이익 저해행위” 금지의 위헌성 판단 - 명확성의 원칙을 중심으로 -", 서울대학교 법학, 49(3), pp.241~280 (2008), 법학연구소
- 이상승, "끼워팔기 법의 소프트웨어 산업에의 적용", 정보법학, 8(2), pp.12~ (2004)
- 이황, "불공정거래행위 중 끼워팔기에 관한 소고 - 대법원 2006.5.24. 선고 2004두3014판결을 대상으로", 경쟁법연구, 14 (2006)
- 장승화, "공정거래법상 “끼워팔기”의 위법성 판단기준 ― 서울고등법원 2004. 2. 10. 선고 2001 누 16288 시정명령 등 취소 사건 ―", 서울대학교 법학, 45(4), pp.491~517 (2004), 법학연구소
- 홍명수, "끼워팔기(Tying)와 결합판매(Bundling)의 규제법리의 비교와 규제체계 정립에 관한 고찰", 규제연구, 15(1), pp.157~188 (2006), 한국규제학회
- Arndt, "TKG Kommentar", ESV, ~ (2008)
- American Bar Ass’n, "Antitrust law development(5.ed)" (2005), ABA
- Bechtold, "GWB-Kommentar(6. Aufl.)" (2010), C.H.Beck
- Bechtold, "EG-Kartellrecht" (2005), C.H.Beck
- Ellhauge, "United States antitrust law and economics" (2008), Foundation press
- Elhauge, "Grobal antitrust law and economics" (2007), Foundation press
- Faull, "The EC Law of competition" (2007)
- Gavil, "Antitrust law in perspective:cases, concepts and problems in competition policy(2.ed.)" (2008), Thomson
- Hovenkamp, "Federal Antitrust Policy" (2005), Aspen
- Jones, "EC Competition law(4.ed.)" (2011)
- Langer, "Tying and bundling as a leveraging concern under EC competition law" (2007), Kluwer law
- Loewenheim, "Kartellrecht kommentar Bd.2" (2006), C.H.Beck
- Roth QC, "ellamy&Child European Community law of Competition(3. ed)" (2013)
- Whish, "Competition law(6.ed)" (2009)
- Ahlborn, "The antitrust economics of tying:a farewell to per se illegality", Antitrust Bulletin, pp.287~ (2004)
- Bowman, "Tying arrangements and the leverage problem", Yale L.J., 67 (1957)
- Tying, exclusive dealing and franchising issues, "Cantor", ~, pp.PLI Order No. 14450 (2008)
- Crane, "Mixed bundling, profit sacrifice and consumer welfare", Emory Law Journal (2006)
- Evans, "Why do firms bundle and tie? Evidence from competitive markets and implication for tying law", Yale J. on Reg, 22 (2005)
- Grimes, "Antitrust and the systemic bias against small business:Kodak, strategic conduct and leverage theory", Case W. Res. L. Rev., 52 (2001)
- Bundling, tying and portpolio effects, "Nalebuff", DTI, ~, pp.DTI economic paper No.1 (2003)
- Schwartz, "Confusing bundling with tying under Art.82:: ‘Batteries included’ or ‘it only comes with fries’", Hastings Bus. L.J, 6, pp.145~ (2010)
- Zain, "Sword or shield? An overview and competitive analysis of the marketing of authorized generics", Food & Drug L.J, 62, pp.739~ (2007)
- Broadband bundling : trend and policy implication, "OECD", DSTI, CISP, pp.2011, ~