사법적 관점에서 본 공정거래법 ― 시장지배적지위 남용행위를 중심으로 ―
Korean Competition Law From a Private Law Perspective ― Focussed on Abuse of Market-dominant Position ―
0
조회
0
다운로드
23
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article examines how to understand the substantive provisions of Korean competition law and how to establish criteria for those interpretation and assessment with a focuss on abuse of market-dominant position. The discussion here starts with a understanding that a legal relationship with which competition law works basically premises a legal relationship between private persons and competition law has developed by establishing substantive requirements to be applied to private law relationships based on the objectives extending from the perspective of co-ordination of interests to that of trade and market order. This understanding leads to the affirmative valuation for the role of judges as experts in enforcing private laws and producing case laws in the competition law field to the effect of revitalizing discussions on competition law from a private law perspective. Following this, this article makes clear that the Supreme Court of Korea in Posco judgment describes the value of the primary purpose of competition law representing “protection of competition” in relation to the principle of freedom of contract as correcting its flaws and restoring its original function. Such recognition seems to have affected the way in which the Supreme Court assessed the illegality of conduct in the specific case. Furthermore, the requirements establishing abuse of market-dominant position are analyzed element by element by categorizing as violator, conduct and illegality in terms of substantive law analysis in this article. Abuse of market-dominant position as a representative violation type regulated for the improvement of trade activities in the market should be worth attention as it shows the characteristics of competition law more than any other violations having relevance to the private law as well though. As such, a discreet, normative approach is required to harmonize and balance between considerations both from private law and competition law aimed at conflicting values. In this regard, so-called “form-based approach” is arguably still valid for the interpretative method of the Korean competition law if taking so-called “effect-based approach” as an complementary, analytic tool from the aspect of the market performance.
Abstract
This article examines how to understand the substantive provisions of Korean competition law and how to establish criteria for those interpretation and assessment with a focuss on abuse of market-dominant position. The discussion here starts with a understanding that a legal relationship with which competition law works basically premises a legal relationship between private persons and competition law has developed by establishing substantive requirements to be applied to private law relationships based on the objectives extending from the perspective of co-ordination of interests to that of trade and market order. This understanding leads to the affirmative valuation for the role of judges as experts in enforcing private laws and producing case laws in the competition law field to the effect of revitalizing discussions on competition law from a private law perspective. Following this, this article makes clear that the Supreme Court of Korea in Posco judgment describes the value of the primary purpose of competition law representing “protection of competition” in relation to the principle of freedom of contract as correcting its flaws and restoring its original function. Such recognition seems to have affected the way in which the Supreme Court assessed the illegality of conduct in the specific case. Furthermore, the requirements establishing abuse of market-dominant position are analyzed element by element by categorizing as violator, conduct and illegality in terms of substantive law analysis in this article. Abuse of market-dominant position as a representative violation type regulated for the improvement of trade activities in the market should be worth attention as it shows the characteristics of competition law more than any other violations having relevance to the private law as well though. As such, a discreet, normative approach is required to harmonize and balance between considerations both from private law and competition law aimed at conflicting values. In this regard, so-called “form-based approach” is arguably still valid for the interpretative method of the Korean competition law if taking so-called “effect-based approach” as an complementary, analytic tool from the aspect of the market performance.
참고문헌 (44)
- 권오승, "?(제5판)소비자보호법" (2005), 법문사
- 권오승, "경제법(제6판)" (2008), 법문사
- 권재열, "경제법" (2005), 법원사
- 박상용, "?(개정판)경제법원론?" (2006), 박영사
- 박세일, "?(개정판)법경제학?" (2004), 박영사
- 송정원, "해설 카르텔 및 불공정거래행위 규제" (2005), 박영사
- 신현윤, "?(제2판)경제법" (2007), 법문사
- 양명조, "경제법강의(제5판)" (2007), 신조사
- 이기수, "경제법(제6판)" (2004), 세창출판사
- 이철송, "?(제9판)상법강의?" (2008), 박영사
- 이호영, "독점규제법의 이론과 실무" (2006), 홍문사
- 임영철, "공정거래법: 해설과 논점" (2007), 법문사
- 장승화, "공정거래법상 금지청구와 손해배상청구: OECD 국가들의 비교법적 고찰?, OECD 연구시리즈 01-02 (대외경제정책연구원", ~ (2001)
- 정호열, "?(제2판)경제법?" (2008), 박영사
- Gerber, David J., "Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe: Protecting Prometheus" (2001), Oxford University Press
- Hovenkamp, "Federal Antitrust Policy: The Law of Competition and its Practice (2nd Ed.)" (1999), West Group
- Jones, Alison, "EC Competition Law (3rd Ed.)" (2008), Oxford University Press
- Rittner, F., "Wirtschaftsrecht" (1987), Heidelberg: C. F. M?ler
- Rittner, F., "Wettbewerbs-und Kartellrecht" (1999), Heidelberg: C. F. M?ler
- 김구년, "독점규제법상 손해배상청구소송의 제문제”", 비교사법, 14(1)통권 : 36호 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
- 김영갑, "경제법학의 현황과 발전 방향", 재판자료, 87 (2000), 법원도서관
- 이기종, "공정거래법상 손해배상청구소송에 있어서의 경제분석에 관한 연구", 상사법연구, 25(3) (2006), 한국상사법학회
- 이봉의, "공정거래법상 방해남용의 위법성 판단기준-거래거절을 중심으로-", 법조, (565) (2003), 법조협회
- 이봉의, "독점적 사업자의 끼워팔기: 마이크로소프트사(MS)의 지위남용을 중심으로", 법과 사회, 27 (2004), 법과사회이론학회
- 이봉의, "불공정거래행위의 위법성" (2004), 법문사
- 이봉의, "공정거래법의 목적과 경쟁제한행위의 위법성", 경제법판례연구, 2 (2005), 법문사
- 이봉의, "경제적 동일체이론과 공동의 시장지배에 관한 소고”, (경제법판례연구회 발표자료", ~ (2007)
- 이봉의, "독점규제법상 재판매가격유지행위의 성격과 규제체계에 관한 소고", 법학, 48(4) (2007), 서울대학교
- 이봉의, "보험산업에서의 불공정거래행위에 관한 경쟁법적 고찰", BFL, (29) (2008), 서울대학교 금융법센터
- 이승철, "공정거래법의 사적 집행에 관한 연구", 법과 경제학 (1997), 한국경제연구원
- 임원택, "불공정거래행위에 관한 연구”, 성소미·신광식 편, ?공정거래 관련 법령의 개선방안?(한국개발연구원", ~ (2003)
- 주순식, "경쟁정책의 목적과 소비자" (2004), 법문사
- 차성민, "독점규제법상 사업자 개념에 관한 연구", 박사, 법학, pp.2002
- 홍대식, "독점규제법상 불공정거래행위의 사법적 효력", 사법논집, 30 (1999), 법원도서관
- 홍대식, "우월적지위의 남용행위의 위법성 판단기준", 경쟁법연구, 7 (2001), 한국경쟁법학회
- 홍대식, "카르텔 규제의 집행: 행정적 집행수단과 법원의 역할을 중심으로", 경쟁법연구, 12 (2005), 법문사
- 홍대식, "불공정거래행위와 공서양속", 비교사법, 14(1)통권 : 36호 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
- 홍대식, "카르텔로 인한 손해액의 산정: 이론과 실제", 비교사법, 14(3)통권 : 38호 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
- 홍대식, "기업결합 심사기준의 개정 내용에 대한 검토: 경쟁제한성 판단기준을 중심으로", 법조, (622) (2008), 한국법조협회
- 홍명수, "수직적 거래제한에 관한 연구", 석사, pp.1997
- 홍명수, "시장획정 방식의 개선과 과제", 법과 사회, 29 (2005), 법과사회이론학회
- 홍명수, "지배력 남용의 의의와 유형화에 대한 고찰" (2007), 법문사
- 홍명수, "비씨카드 사건에서 시장지배력과 가격남용 판단의 타당성 고찰", 경제법판례연구, 4 (2008), 법문사
- 황창식, "공정거래법상 시장지배력 남용 규제의 해석 및 집행상의 문제점-불공정거래행위 규제와의 법적용 관계를 중심으로” (경제법판례연구회 발표자료", ~ (2008)