입찰담합 : 입찰/경매 방해죄(형법 제315조)의 엄격한 적용 대상
Bid-Rigging: the Object of Strict Application of a Provision against Bid/auction Interference (Korea's Criminal Code sec.315)
0
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Abstract
A bid-rigging, which causes much damages to bid-offerer, restrict competition on merits, and obstruct fairness of bid procedure, has been condoned by lenient interpretation of criminal bid/auction interference provision (Criminal Code sec.315) of Supreme Court of Korea as well as low penalty of the provision, although Fair Trade Commission has energetically run its surcharge on bid-riggers. On the other hand, the United States, Germany, and Japan has enacted severe penalty against bid-rigging by criminalization of collusive bidding. Even international organizations adopted resolutions recommending that member countries enact domestic law prohibiting hard core cartels including bid-rigging. Among penalty provisions targetting at bid-rigging in other laws, sec.315 needs to operate as general law penalizing collusive bidding as rules interpreting sec.315 and sentencing under the section can influence rules and sentencings under Monopoly Restraint Fair Trade Act and Construction Industries Standard Act which includes penalty against bid-rigging. Hesitant attitudes of Supreme Court regarding punishing collusive bidders, based on obsolete defense of destructive competition, should be replaced by strong penalty along with straightforward application of sec.315. Systematic improvement of bid/auction institutions will more effectively address concerns about low-quality product and destructive competition than the existent lenient practices.
참고문헌 (38)
- 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론", ~ (2004)
- 배종대, "형법총론", ~ (2001)
- 백형구, "형법각론", ~ (2002)
- 이재상, "형법총론", ~ (2008)
- 이재상, "형법각론", ~ (2008)
- 이회창, "주석형법(Ⅳ) 각칙(2)", ~ (1997)
- 이회창, "주석형법(V) 각칙(3)", ~ (1997)
- 정영일, "형법각론", ~ (2008)
- 허찬무, "공정거래법과 카르텔규제", ~ (2000)
- American Bar Association, "Criminal Antitrust Litigation Handbook", ~ (2008)
- Rudolph J.R. Peritz, "Competition Policy in America: History", Rhetoric, Law, ~ (1996)
- 김종수, "입찰방해", 사법행정, 4(9), pp.65~67 (1963)
- 노경필, "입찰방해죄의 성립을 인정한 사례(2006.12.12 선고 2004도2582 판결)", 대법원판례해설, (66), pp.302~330 (2007)
- 신동권, "입찰담합에 대한 과징금부과 문제", 경쟁저널, 통권 : 115, pp.30~43 (2005)
- 신영수, "공공조달시장의 입찰담합 방지를 위한 법제 개선의 방향", 법제 (2007)
- 신영수, "공정거래법상 입찰담합규제 활성화 방안에 관한 고찰 -건설시장을 중심으로-", 상사법연구, 27(1), pp.79~122 (2008), 한국상사법학회
- 李相暾, "公正去來秩序와 刑法政策", 법제연구, (25), pp.167~195 (2003), 한국법제연구원
- 이인권, "입찰담합으로 인한 손해액의 통계적 추정에 대한 고찰", 법경제학연구, 5(1), pp.39~83 (2008), 한국법경제학회
- 정원, "건설입찰담함 방지를 위한 제도개선방안", 인권과 정의, (379), pp.97~125 (2008), 대한변호사협회
- 정유철, "입찰담합(카르텔) 관련 손해액 산정과 문제점", 363~411
- Donald I. Baker, "The Use of Criminal Law Remedies to Deter and Punish Cartels and Bid-Rigging", George Washington Law Review, 69, pp.693~714 (2001)
- "대법원 1960.8.4. 4292형상96 (집 8, 57)", ~
- "대법원 1971.4.30. 71도519", ~
- "대법원 1982.11.9. 81도537 (공 696, 81)", ~
- "대법원 1983.1.18. 81도824 (공 700, 457)", ~
- "대법원 2003.9.26. 2002도3924", ~
- "대법원 2004.4.14. 2004노213", ~
- "대법원 2006.12.22. 2004도2581", ~
- "서울지법 2001.10.23. 2001고단1144", ~
- "서울중앙지법 2004.7.22. 2003고단10854", ~
- "서울중앙지법 2004.11.26. 2003노11018", ~
- "공정거래위원회 심결 2001. 2.28. 2000심이1470 (재결 2001-010호)", ~
- "U.S. v. Azzarelli Construction Co. 612 F.2d 292, 298 (7th Cir. 1979)", ~
- "U.S. v. Salerno, 86 CR 245 (1986)", ~
- "U.S. v. Salerno, 868 F.2d 524 (2d Cri.1989), cert' denied 491 U.S. 907, 493 U.S. 811 (1989)", ~
- "Moore v. U.S., 865 F.2d 149 (7th Cir. Ct.App. 1989)", ~
- "U.S. v. Gilliland, 312 U.S. 86, 93 (1991)", ~
- "Shaw v. U.S. 371 F. Supp.2d 265 (E.D.New York, 2005)", ~