소비자 불매운동의 정당성 - 헌법적 허용한계와 형법적 규제의 타당성-
Legality of Consumer Boycott - Centered on Constitutional Limits and Validity of its Criminal Regulation -
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It is stipulated in Article 5 of the Korean Consumer Framework Act that consumers can legitimately exercise their fundamental rights granted under its Article 4. But the Act does not give any answers regarding whether the consumer boycott is justifiable, or whether it incurs any civil or criminal liabilities. Because there is no provision regulating consumer boycotts under the Act, it is possible that consumers involved are punished in accordance with Article 314 of the Korean Penal Code. When the so-called candlelight vigil against US beef imports was held in 2008, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced the defendants, who boycotted goods from three newspaper companies, to be guilty in regards to the violations against for 1st Section of Article 314, Article 324, and 1st Section of Article 350 of the Penal Code. In this context, the legality of consumer boycott needs to be critically considered. Also, it should be inquired into if the criminal regulations of consumer boycotts have validity from the constitutional perspective. If consumer boycotts meet certain basic requirements, for example (i) public interests (ii) subject of rights (iii) peaceful means (iv) self-activity (v) fair information etc, consumers have to be immune from civil or criminal responsibilities with respect to those boycotts. Therefore, it is unfair to apply the above-mentioned criminal provisions to consumer boycotts without no careful consideration of its justifications. The court plays a key role in supporting the activities of corporations or companies. Therefore, with no specific provision to regulate consumer boycotts, the court needs to take into account such requirements as its purpose, subject, means, etc in the case. And the validity of criminal regulations should be reviewed, only when it is assessed that consumer boycotts deviate from constitutional limits given.
Abstract
It is stipulated in Article 5 of the Korean Consumer Framework Act that consumers can legitimately exercise their fundamental rights granted under its Article 4. But the Act does not give any answers regarding whether the consumer boycott is justifiable, or whether it incurs any civil or criminal liabilities. Because there is no provision regulating consumer boycotts under the Act, it is possible that consumers involved are punished in accordance with Article 314 of the Korean Penal Code. When the so-called candlelight vigil against US beef imports was held in 2008, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced the defendants, who boycotted goods from three newspaper companies, to be guilty in regards to the violations against for 1st Section of Article 314, Article 324, and 1st Section of Article 350 of the Penal Code. In this context, the legality of consumer boycott needs to be critically considered. Also, it should be inquired into if the criminal regulations of consumer boycotts have validity from the constitutional perspective. If consumer boycotts meet certain basic requirements, for example (i) public interests (ii) subject of rights (iii) peaceful means (iv) self-activity (v) fair information etc, consumers have to be immune from civil or criminal responsibilities with respect to those boycotts. Therefore, it is unfair to apply the above-mentioned criminal provisions to consumer boycotts without no careful consideration of its justifications. The court plays a key role in supporting the activities of corporations or companies. Therefore, with no specific provision to regulate consumer boycotts, the court needs to take into account such requirements as its purpose, subject, means, etc in the case. And the validity of criminal regulations should be reviewed, only when it is assessed that consumer boycotts deviate from constitutional limits given.
참고문헌 (35)
- "대판 2001.7.13, 98다51091", ~
- 우희숙, "쟁의행위와 위력업무방해죄의 관계 —이론과 판례—", 노동법논총, 20, pp.101~141 (2010), 한국비교노동법학회
- "서울지법 2009.2.19, 2008고단5024(업무방해)", ~
- "서울지법 2009.10.29, 2009고단4470(공갈, 강요)", ~
- 박지현, "위력에 의한 업무방해죄와 광고주 불매운동", 민주법학, (40), pp.79~124 (2009), 민주주의법학연구회
- "대판 2003.12.26, 2001도1863", ~
- "대판 2005.2.25, 2004도8530", ~
- "대판 2006.5.25, 2002도5577", ~
- "대판 2008.9.11, 2004도746", ~
- 이상돈, "부실감사의 형사책임, In 윤리경영과 형법", pp.227~ (2005), 신영사
- "서울지법 1998.2.12, 97가합34520", ~
- 鄭克元, "헌법체계상 소비자권리의 보장", 공법연구, 31(3), pp.12~12 (2003), 한국공법학회
- 이준복, "소비자기본권 확립을 위한 헌법적 고찰 -<인터넷광고와 소비자권리를 중심으로>-", 세계헌법연구, 15(1), pp.281~308 (2009), 세계헌법학회한국학회
- 김성천, "소비자보호형법에 관한 소고", 외법논집, 4, pp.2~3 (1997)
- 주승희, "소비자불매운동의 의의 및 법적 허용 한계 검토", 경영법률, 19(3), pp.515~542 (2009), 한국경영법률학회
- 김상겸, "인터넷을 통한 소비자 운동의 자유에 관한 연구", 세계헌법연구, 15(1), pp.25~46 (2009), 세계헌법학회한국학회
- 김동균, "소비자기본법의 문제점과 개정의견", 기업법연구, 23(1), pp.111~138 (2009), 한국기업법학회
- 허경옥, "소비자기본법 시행 이후 소비자정책의 방향에 대한 소고", 소비자문제연구, (35), pp.85~99 (2009), 한국소비자원
- 박성용, "소비자정책측면에서 규제완화정책의 방향", 소비자문제연구, 36, pp.67~85 (2009), 한국소비자원
- 이승선, "언론소비자 운동에 있어 광고불매 운동의 의미", 2009년 한국언론정보학회 토론회 언론소비자운동과 광고불매운동, pp.40~ (2009)
- 신종원, "21세기 소비자 주권-새로운 소비자운동을 요청한다-", 1998년 정기총회 및 학술대회, 한국소비자학회, pp.54~ (1998), 한국소비자학회
- 고형석, "소비자기본법의 평가와 과제 - 소비자기본법 제정 30주년을 맞이하여 -", 저스티스, (120), pp.5~47 (2010), 한국법학원
- 이성환, "소비자보호법의 개정방향", 공법학연구, 6(1), pp.309~339 (2005), 한국비교공법학회
- 김문환, "미국 소비자 신용의 최근 동향", 법학논총, 22(2), pp.305~343 (2010), 법학연구소
- 가정준, "소비자 보호에 대한 미국법의 시각", 한국재산법학회 학술대회 발표집 (2007)
- 김문조, "미국의 소비자운동", 지역연구, 3(3) (1994)
- White, "Law as Rhetoric as Law: The Art of Cultural and Communal Life", Law and Language, 684~ (2000)
- 박경신, "소비자들의 2차불매운동의 합법성-외국의 공정거래법 및 노사관계법의 유비적 비교법적 의미-", 미국헌법과 한국사회, ~ (2009)
- "NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 393 So. 2d 1290, 1301(Miss. 1980)", ~ (1980)
- 이규호, "미국에 있어서 소비자보이콧에 관한 판례・학설-그 법적 허용한계의 문제를 중심으로-", 판례실무연구, Ⅴ, pp.312~376 (2001)
- 김재경, "제3자에 대한 소비자불매운동에 있어서 형사법적 고찰 -소위 조선·중앙·동아일보에 대한 광고불매운동을 중심으로-", 法學論文集, 33(2), pp.165~184 (2009), 법학연구원
- Kufman, "Bargaining Theory, Inflation and Cyclical Strike Activity in Manufacturing", Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 34, pp.333~355 (1981)
- "서울지법 2010.10.5, 2009노3623", ~
- 박지현, "언론사 광고주에 대한 불매운동의 고지행위의 형사책임 ― 서울중앙지법 2009노3623 판결에 대한 평석 ―", 민주법학, (44), pp.253~273 (2010), 민주주의법학연구회
- 도재형, "파업과 업무방해죄 ― 한국에서 단결 금지 법리의 정립 과정 ―", 노동법학, (34), pp.63~107 (2010), 한국노동법학회