거래상 지위의 남용행위의 거래상대방에 따른 위법성 판단기준 - 대법원 2011. 5. 13. 선고 2009두24108 판결 -
Standards of judgment on illegality of abusing the trade position - focused on differentiation depending on transaction adversary [Supreme Court Decision 2009Du24108 Decided May 13, 2011(Claim for cancellation of Correction Order)]
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Recently, Korean Supreme Court, in case where the plaintiff company set a goal through Gaya Cable TV belonging to the plaintiff company, to subcontractors to attract new subscribers of Cable TV and the Internet, and the plaintiff company reduced subcontractors’ commission fees which the pliantiff company should pay, affirmed the judgment below which decided that hindering subcontractors’ free decision-making or coercing them disadvantage such as above acts was likely to hinder the fair trade as abusing the trade position(imposed sales target). Article 23(1) of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act has a clause prohibiting on unfair business practices and unfair business practices involve various types of illegal practices, which causes various legislation and interpretation arguments on both classification of practice type as a formal requirement and standards of judging illegality as practical requirement. Accordingly, national arguments on unfair business practices have been focused on both how to deal with the types of ban not related to competition restriction effect with respect to formal requirements and how to interpret the meaning fair trade hindering or unfairness with respect to practical requirements. Freedom of competition is worth protecting from unfair methods. That’s why fair trade hindering should be judged based on entire economcial legitimacy and as much as prohibiting abusing the trade position is supposed to be intervention in free economic activities of private sectors, practices intervention targets should be limited to the case where the trade position of one transaction party is significant enough to bind the decision-making of the other party and abusing trade position cause a disadvantage to the other transaction party situated in weaker position. Then, standards of judging illegality needs to depend on the amount of information which the transaction parties participating in economic activities could get, the parties’ capacity to collect and deal with information or the balance degree of the parties’s position. Namely, if the other party is not a business, the more strict standards shall be needed. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market which EU adopted on May 11,2005, could be a good reference on differentiation of standards of judgment on illegality depending on transaction adversary.
Abstract
Recently, Korean Supreme Court, in case where the plaintiff company set a goal through Gaya Cable TV belonging to the plaintiff company, to subcontractors to attract new subscribers of Cable TV and the Internet, and the plaintiff company reduced subcontractors’ commission fees which the pliantiff company should pay, affirmed the judgment below which decided that hindering subcontractors’ free decision-making or coercing them disadvantage such as above acts was likely to hinder the fair trade as abusing the trade position(imposed sales target). Article 23(1) of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act has a clause prohibiting on unfair business practices and unfair business practices involve various types of illegal practices, which causes various legislation and interpretation arguments on both classification of practice type as a formal requirement and standards of judging illegality as practical requirement. Accordingly, national arguments on unfair business practices have been focused on both how to deal with the types of ban not related to competition restriction effect with respect to formal requirements and how to interpret the meaning fair trade hindering or unfairness with respect to practical requirements. Freedom of competition is worth protecting from unfair methods. That’s why fair trade hindering should be judged based on entire economcial legitimacy and as much as prohibiting abusing the trade position is supposed to be intervention in free economic activities of private sectors, practices intervention targets should be limited to the case where the trade position of one transaction party is significant enough to bind the decision-making of the other party and abusing trade position cause a disadvantage to the other transaction party situated in weaker position. Then, standards of judging illegality needs to depend on the amount of information which the transaction parties participating in economic activities could get, the parties’ capacity to collect and deal with information or the balance degree of the parties’s position. Namely, if the other party is not a business, the more strict standards shall be needed. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market which EU adopted on May 11,2005, could be a good reference on differentiation of standards of judgment on illegality depending on transaction adversary.
참고문헌 (32)
- 권오승, "(제2판)경제법" (2000), 법문사
- 이기수, "(제5판)경제법" (2003), 세창출판사
- 임영철, "공정거래법 해설과 논점" (2007), 법문사
- 정호열, "(제2판)경제법" (2008), 박영사
- 여정성, "소비자와 법의 지배" (2008), 서울대학교 출판부
- 공정거래위원회, "공정거래백서" (2011), 공정거래위원회
- 이문지, "불공정거래행위의 규제와 경제적 효율성", 규제연구, 8(1) (1999), 한국경제연구원
- 이문지, "불공정거래행위 규제이 문제점과 보완방안", 기업법연구, 5 (2000), 한국기업법학회
- 이문지, "시장지배적 지위의 남용 금지에 관한 유럽연합의 최근 동향 - 유럽위원회의 지침서(Guidance Paper)를 중심으로", 상사판례연구, 23(4), pp.267~293 (2010), 한국상사판례학회
- 변동열, "거래상 지위의 남용행위와 경쟁 - 대법원 2000. 6. 9. 선고 97누19427 판결", 저스티스, 34(4) (2001)
- 김윤정, "독점규제법의 목적으로서의 소비자보호의 의미: 불공정거래행위의 유형별 고 찰", 경쟁법연구 (2006), 한국경쟁법학회
- 심재한, "공정거래법상 불공정거래행위에 대한 연구", 안암법학, (27), pp.541~572 (2008), 안암법학회
- 홍대식, "우월적 지위의 남용행위의 위법성 판단기준", 경쟁법연구, 7 (2001), 한국경쟁법학회
- 홍대식, "사법적 관점에서 본 불공정 거래 행위", 경쟁법연구, 18, pp.203~243 (2008), 한국경쟁법학회
- 불공정거래행위의 위법성 판단기준에 대한 재검토:보다 시장친화적인 기준 정립을 위하여, "홍대식", 한국공정거래조정원, ~, pp.법․경제연구그룹(LEG) 연구보고서 (2009)
- 홍대식, "유럽연합(EU)의 ｢불공정한 상관행 지침｣에 대한 고찰, 서울대 경쟁법센터 편, 공정거래법의 쟁점과 과제" (2010), 법문사
- 서정, "불공정거래행위의 사법상 효력", 민사판례연구, (31), pp.769~824 (2009), 민사판례연구회
- 조홍식, "하나의 유럽: 유럽연합의 역사와 정책" (2009), 푸른길
- Hugh Collins, "“EC Regulation of Unfair Commercial Practice”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Hans-W.Micklitz, "“A General Framework Directive on Fair trading”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Guido Alpa, "“Rules on Competition and Fair Trading”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Giorgio De Nova, "“Conflict of Interests and the Fair Dealing Duty”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣," (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Geraint Howells, "“Co-regulation’s Role in the Development of European Fair Trading Laws”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Jules Stuyck, "“EC Competition Rules on Vertical Restrictions and the Realities of a Changing Retail Sector of National Contract Laws”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Fernando Gomez, "“EC Consumer Protection Law and EC Competition Law: How Related are They? A Law and Economics Perspective”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Stefan Grundmann, "“EC Consumer and EC Competition Law: How Related are They? Examining the Exitsting EC Contract Law Sources”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Thomas Wilhelmsson, "“Contract Law Enforcement of Provision on Marketing: The Solution of the Consumer Sale Directive”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Luisa Antoniolli, "Consumer Protection, Fair Dealing in Marketing Contract and European Contract Law - A Uniform Law?”, ｢The Forthcoming EC Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices｣" (2004), Kluwer Law Internationa
- Geraint Howells, "European Fair Trading Law: The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive" (2006), Ashgate
- New Laws to Stop Unfair Behaviour towards Consumers: The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, "European Commission", Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General, ~ (2006)
- European Commission, "Guidance on the Implementation", Application of Directive 2005, EC on Unfair Commercial Practices, pp.http:[DOI]
- Wikipedia, "Unfair Commercial Practices Directive", http:, en.wikipedia. org, pp.wiki, Unfair_Commercial_Practices_Directive[DOI]