본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

최근 독점규제법 주요 판례에 나타난 비교법경제학적 쟁점 분석

A Comparative Law and Economics Analysis of Recent Korean Competition Law Casws

주진열
한국경쟁법학회 (Korean Competition Law Association)|2011.05|경쟁법연구 (Journal of Korean Competition Law)|제23권 |pp. 338-380

0

조회

0

다운로드

7

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

불공정거래행위부당지원행위법경제학기업결합mergersresale price maintenanceempirical analysislaw and economicsunfair trade가격담합Abuse of market dominance시장지배적지위남용재판매가격유지경제이론실증경제분석price-fixingillegal supporteconomic theory

초록

Considering the fact that the increasing numbers of antitrust cases involving complex economic issues and the increasing status of economic analysis in antitrust cases, it is natural to say that economic analysis can be the most reasonable criterion in deciding whether a certain unilateral practice should be prohibited or not. In theory, there is no doubt that economic evidence is essential for proper regulation of unilateral practices. In the real world,however, it should be noted that there always exits a possibility of misuse and/or abuse of economic analysis. In particular, abuse of economic analysis will undermine the credibility of economic evidence itself. Once the reliability of economic analysis itself is undermined, it would be extremely difficult to use the economic evidence as the most reasonable criterion for optimal regulation. Then an undesirable political decision can more easily ignore sound economic reasoning, and distort market. In this sense, as far as the problem of misuse and/or abuse cannot be properly solved, it would hard to say that more economic analysis can guarantee optimal regulation.

Abstract

Considering the fact that the increasing numbers of antitrust cases involving complex economic issues and the increasing status of economic analysis in antitrust cases, it is natural to say that economic analysis can be the most reasonable criterion in deciding whether a certain unilateral practice should be prohibited or not. In theory, there is no doubt that economic evidence is essential for proper regulation of unilateral practices. In the real world,however, it should be noted that there always exits a possibility of misuse and/or abuse of economic analysis. In particular, abuse of economic analysis will undermine the credibility of economic evidence itself. Once the reliability of economic analysis itself is undermined, it would be extremely difficult to use the economic evidence as the most reasonable criterion for optimal regulation. Then an undesirable political decision can more easily ignore sound economic reasoning, and distort market. In this sense, as far as the problem of misuse and/or abuse cannot be properly solved, it would hard to say that more economic analysis can guarantee optimal regulation.

참고문헌 (70)

  1. 곽상현, "수평결합에 대한 경쟁제한성 판단기준", 저스티스, (116), pp.161~213 (2010), 한국법학원
  2. 신영수, "의식적 병행행위의 규제논거", 경쟁법연구, 11 (2005)
  3. 윤인성, "포스코열연코일 공급거절 판결의 주요 쟁점 및 향후 과제에 관한 소고", BFL, (30) (2008)
  4. 이봉의, "보건의료산업 리베이트관행의 경쟁법적 쟁점과 과제", 서울대학교 법학, 50(4), pp.195~220 (2009), 법학연구소
  5. 이봉의, "포스코판결과 방해남용의 향방", 경쟁저널, 통권 : 140 (2008)
  6. 이봉의, "독점규제법상 재판매가격유지행위 금지의 헌법적합성 판단", 서울대학교 법학, 51(3), pp.325~355 (2010), 법학연구소
  7. 이호영, "경쟁법 사건절차상 경제전문가 증언의 활용에 관한 연구", 경쟁법연구, 20, pp.66~106 (2009), 한국경쟁법학회
  8. 이호영, "공정거래법상 시장지배적사업자 규제의 재점과 과제", 저스티스, (104), pp.75~99 (2008), 한국법학원
  9. 이호영, "독점규제법상 과점기업의 묵시적 사업조정의 규제", 인권과 정의, (348), pp.42~67 (2005), 대한변호사협회
  10. 이황, "공정거래법상 단독의 위반행위 규제의 체계 - 시장지배적 지위 남용행위로서의 거래거절행위의 위법성, 그 본질과 판단기준", 사법, 1(5), pp.201~263 (2008), 사법발전재단
  11. 전성훈, "시장획정 방법론으로서 임계매출감소분석의 발전과 논쟁", 경쟁법연구, 21, pp.56~80 (2010), 한국경쟁법학회
  12. 조성국, "시장지배적 지위남용에 대한 위법성 판단기준에 관한 연구 - 대법원판결을 중심으로", 경쟁법연구, 19, pp.367~399 (2009), 한국경쟁법학회
  13. 조성국, "美國 카르텔 規制法理의 發展과 우리나라에 주는 示唆點", 중앙법학, 9(1), pp.349~373 (2007), 중앙법학회
  14. 주진열, "기업결합규제와 효율성 항변 판단기준에 대한 법경제학적 고찰", 경제법연구, 9(1), pp.77~106 (2010), 한국경제법학회
  15. 주진열, "공정거래소송에 있어서 경제적 증거 평가에 대한 일고찰", 경쟁법연구, 19, pp.159~192 (2009), 한국경쟁법학회
  16. 주진열, "가격담합과 조인트벤처의 부수적 제한 법리 - 대법원 2008. 8. 21. 선고 2007두4919 판결을 중심으로", 경제법연구, 7(2), pp.49~69 (2008), 한국경제법학회
  17. 기업결합심사의 후생기준과 효율성 증대효과의 판단, "최충규", 한국경제연구원, ~ (2005)
  18. 허 선, "공정거래사건에서의 경제분석의 증거력을 논의해 보자", 경쟁저널, 통권 : 132 (2007)
  19. 홍대식, "카르텔로 인한 손해액의 산정: 이론과 실제", 비교사법, 14(3), pp.1101~1136 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
  20. 홍대식, "공정거래법상 부당지원행위에 관한 판례상 쟁점", 경영과 법, 1 (2007), 서강대
  21. 홍대식, "부당한 공동행위의 성립: 사례연구", 서강법학연구, 10(1), pp.89~115 (2008), 법학연구소
  22. 홍명수, "독점규제법상 기업결합의 규제체계와 효율성 항변에 대한 고찰", 비교사법, 14(1), pp.167~186 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
  23. 홍명수, "시장지배적 지위 남용으로서 거래거절의 의의와 위법성 판단", 법학연구, 51(1), pp.737~765 (2010), 법학연구소
  24. 홍명수, "정보 교환과 카르텔 규제", 법과사회, (36), pp.277~299 (2009), 법과사회이론학회
  25. 황창식, "공정거래법상 시장지배력 남용 규제의 해석 및 집행 상의 문제점 : 불공정거래 행위 규제와의 법적용 관계를 중심으로", 경쟁저널, 통권 : 139 (2008)
  26. American Bar Association Section of Anti, "Econometrics: Legal, Practical, and Technical Issues" (2005), ABA Publishing
  27. Aron, Debra J, "Regulatory Policy and the Reverse Cellophane Fallacy", http:, ssrn.com, pp.abstract=1171292, 2008[DOI]
  28. Blair, Roger D, "Antitrust Economics, 2nd ed" (2008), Oxford University Press
  29. Carlton, Dennis W, "Market Definition: Use and Abuse", Competition Policy International, 3(1) (2007)
  30. Carlton, Dennis W, "Comment on Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission's Proposed Horizontal Merger Guidelines", http:, www.ftc.gov, pp.os, comments[DOI]
  31. Critical Loss vs. Diversion Analysis: Clearing Up the Confusion, "Coate, Malcolm B", The CPI Antitrust Chronicle, ~, pp.No. 1 (2009)
  32. Devine, Kristine Laudadio, "Preserving Competition in Multi-Sided Innovative Markets: How Do You Solve a Problem Like Google", North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology, 10, pp.59~ (2008)
  33. Elhauge, Einer, "Global Antitrust Law and Economics" (2007)
  34. Easterbrook, Frank H, "The Limits of Antitrust", Tex.L.Rev, 63, pp.1~ (1984)
  35. Evans, David S, "Antitrust Issues Raised by the Emerging Global Internet Economy", Northwestern University Law Review, 102, pp.4~ (2008)
  36. Ellig, Jerry, "Dynamic Competition and Public Policy: Technology, Innovation, and Antitrust" (2005), Cambridge University Press
  37. A SSNIP Test for Two-Sided Markets: The Case of Media, "Filistrucchi, Lapo", NET Institute, ~, pp.Working Paper No. 08-34 (2008)
  38. Fisher, Alan A, "Efficiency Considerations in Merger Enforcement", Cal. L. Rev, 71, pp.1580~ (1983)
  39. Gavil, Andrew I, "Antitrust Law in Perspective : Cases, Concepts and Problems in Competition Policy", pp.2002, Thompson
  40. Gellhorn, Ernest, "Antitrust Law and Economics, 5th ed" (2004)
  41. Gerber, David, "Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe: Protecting Prometheus" (1998), Clarendon Press
  42. Goldschmid, Harvey J, "Comment on Herbert Hovenkamp and the Dominant Firm: The Chicago School Has Made Us Too Cautious About False Positives and the Use of Section 2 of the Sherman Act" (2008), Oxford University Press
  43. Gotts, Ilens Knable, "Just the Facts: The Role of Customer and Economic Evidence in M&A Analysis", Geo. Mason L. Rev, 13, pp.1217~ (2006)
  44. Glossner, Christian L, "The Making of the German Post-War Economy: Political Communication and Public Reception of the Social Market Economy after World War Two" (2010), Tauris Academic Studies
  45. Hahn, Robert W, "An Antitrust Analysis of Google's Proposed Acquisition of DoubleClick" (2009), AEI-Brookings Joint Center Related Publication
  46. Harrison, Jeffrey L, "Law and Economics" (2007), W. W. Norton & Company
  47. Hasse, Rolf H, "Social Market Economy: History, Principles and Implementation - From A to Z" (2008), Verlag Ferdinand Schoningh GmbH
  48. Hovenkamp, Herbert, "Federal Antitrust Policy, 3rd ed." (2005), West Group Publishing
  49. Hovenkamp, Herbert, "The Antitrust Enterprise: Principle and Execution" (2005), Harvard University Press
  50. Jackson, Howell E, "Analytical Methods for Lawyers" (2003), Foundation Press
  51. Koslowski, Peter, "The Social Market Economy: Theory and Ethics of the Economic Order" (1998), Springer
  52. Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google, "Manne, Geoffrey A", George Mason Law & Economics Research, ~, pp.No. 10-25 (2010)
  53. Montague, Gilbert H, "““Per Se Illegality” and the Rule of Reason", A.B.A. Antitrust Section, 12, pp.69~ (1958)
  54. Moresi, Serge, "Implementing the Hypothetical Monopolist SSNIP Test with Multi-Product Firms", http:, ssrn.com, pp.abstract=1087536, 2008[DOI]
  55. Page, William H, "The Microsoft Case: Antitrust, High Technology, and Consumer Welfare" (2006), University Of Chicago Press
  56. Pollock, Rufus, "Is Google the Next Microsoft? Competition, Welfare and Regulation in Internet Search", http:, ssrn.com, pp.abstract=1265521, 2009[DOI]
  57. Rochet, Jean-Charles, "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets", http:, www.dauphine.fr, pp.cgemp, Publications[DOI]
  58. Rochet, Jean-Charles, "Two-Sided Markets: A Progress Report", http:, idei.fr, pp.doc, wp[DOI]
  59. Scherer, F.M, "Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 2nd ed." (1980), Rand-McNally
  60. Schmalensee, Richard, "Horizontal Merger Policy: Problems and Changes", Economic Perspectives, 1(2) (1987)
  61. Schmidt, Hedvig, "Competition Law, Innovation and Antitrust: An Analysis of Tying and Technological Integration" (2009), Edward Elgar
  62. Shapiro, Carl, "The 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines: From Hedgehog to Fox in Forty Years", http:, ssrn.com, pp.abstract =1675210, 2010[DOI]
  63. Stocking, George W, "The Cellophane Case and the New Competition", The American Economic Review, 45(1) (1955)
  64. "U.S. DOJ", FTC, Horizontal Merger Guideline, pp.www.justice.gov, atr[DOI]
  65. "U.S. DOJ", FTC, Horizontal Merger Guideline for Public Comment, pp.www.ftc.gov, os[DOI]
  66. Viscusi, W. Kip, "Economics of Regulation and Antitrust, 3rd ed." (2000), The MIT Press
  67. Werden, Gregory J, "A Perspective on the Use of Econometrics in Merger Investigations and Litigation" (2002), Antitrust
  68. Werden, Gregory J, "Economic Evidence on the Existence of Collusion: Reconciling Antitrust Law with Oligopoly Theory", Antitrust L.J, 71, pp.719~ (2004)
  69. Weyl, E. Glen, "The Price Theory of Two-Sided Markets", http:, economics.uchicago.edu, pp.Weyl_011507.pdf, 2006[DOI]
  70. Willig, Robert, "Public Comments on the 2010 Draft Horizontal Merger Guideline", http:, www.ftc.gov, pp.os, comments[DOI]

관련 논문AI추천

경쟁법 집행에서 경제이론 및 경제분석의 역할이상규법학연구소 · 경제규제와 법2023 · 제16권 제2호공정거래소송에 있어서 경제적 증거 평가에 대한 일고찰주진열한국경쟁법학회 · 경쟁법연구2009 · 제19권 공정거래법상 경쟁제한성 요건의 증명방법에 관한 연구주진열사법발전재단 · 사법2012 · 제1권 제22호유통거래 관련 불공정거래행위 금지의 최적화 방안 : 금지요건의 조정을 통한 과잉규제의 억제 모색이문지한국상사판례학회 · 상사판례연구2013 · 제26권 제4호시장지배적지위 남용행위 중 소비자이익저해행위에 대한 규제 방안이영대, 최경규한국경쟁법학회 · 경쟁법연구2013 · 제27권 우리 나라의 독점규제법과 사적 집행의 발전이선희법학연구원 · 성균관법학2011 · 제23권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)

혼합결합의 경쟁제한성 심사기준의 개선방안이효석pp. 3-38부당한 공동행위 합의 입증의 문제홍탁균pp. 39-94불공정거래행위에 관한 대법원 판결 분석(2010) -거래상 지위남용 사건을 중심으로-홍명수pp. 95-116부당한 공동행위 관련 최근 판례 법리의 검토황태희pp. 117-142독점규제법은 경제질서의 기본법이다권오승pp. 143-157
원문 보기