국제상거래에 있어서의 경쟁법에 관한 연구-미국의 경쟁법을 중심으로-
A Study on Competition Laws in International Trade Area- Focused on the US Competition Law and Policy -
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
미국은 셔먼법, 클레이튼법, 연방거래위원회법 등의 연방경쟁법률의 제정 이후 연방법원의 판례를 통해 이러한 경쟁법률을 미국영토 밖에서 행해진 외국인의 행위에 대해 역외적용하는 이론을 확립시켰다. 미국법무부는 확립된 경쟁법의 역외적용이론에 기초하여 국제적 경쟁제한행위를 규제하는 정책을 수립하여 운영하고 있는데, 2000년대에 들어서는 국제적 경쟁제한행위에 가담하는 미국기업과 미국인뿐만 아니라 외국기업과 외국인에게도 중한 형량을 부과하고 있다. 그 뿐 아니라 국경감시, 인터폴, 범죄인인도협약 등의 수단을 통해 외국에 거주하는 외국인에 대해서도 형사처벌을 하겠다는 강한 의지도 보이고 있다. 이러한 미국법무부의 정책운영 과정에서 한국기업들이 미국법무부의 수사대상이 되어 담합 여부에 대한 유죄를 인정하고 벌금을 부과 받거나 기업의 임직원들이 징역형을 부과 받은 사건이 발생하기도 하였다. 이에 앞으로는 미국시장에 영향을 주는 활동을 하는 기업들은 반드시 미국의 경쟁법 체제 및 미국법무부의 정책에 대해 정확하게 이해하고 이에 맞게 임직원들을 교육시키고 지침을 제공할 필요가 있다고 할 것이다. 물론 미국경쟁법의 역외적용은 미국이 강력한 국력을 바탕으로 외국인과 외국기업까지도 규제하려고 한다는 점에서 비난의 대상이 되어오기도 하였다. 그러나 지금에 와서는 우리나라를 비롯한 많은 국가들이 자국의 경쟁법을 역외 적용할 수 있는 기본법리를 수립해 놓은 상태이고, OECD 및 ICN 등의 국제기구와 네트워크를 통해 세계적으로 경쟁법의 수렴현상이 일어나고 있다. 이러한 경쟁법 환경에서 한국 기업들은 미국의 경쟁법 체제뿐만 아니라 세계적인 경쟁법의 변화를 잘 파악하고, 경영수준을 국제적인 수준으로 향상시켜 세계시장에서의 경쟁력을 갖추어야 할 것이다. 정부 및 학계도 기업이 이렇게 변화하는 경쟁법 환경에 잘 적응할 수 있도록 교육과 지원에 힘써야 할 것이다.
Abstract
The three major federal competition laws of the United States are the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and the Federal Trade Commission Act. Under these acts, Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice has an authority to either initiate criminal prosecution or bring a civil action against the individuals and corporations who allegedly violate the relevant competition laws. The US Department of Justice has in recent years adopted a policy of strongly regulating international antitrust activities which bring effects to the US markets. Based on the principle of extraterritorial application of the US competition laws, which was established through US court judgments, the Department has prosecuted many foreign corporations and foreign individuals as well as the US corporations and the US individuals. In the year of 2005 and 2007, Korean companies pled guilty at the US Department of Justice of fixing the prices of the goods and services supplied to the US market. United States' extraterritorial application of its competition laws has been criticized by other countries as an attempt to regulate other sovereign states. However, these days, many countries including the Republic of Korea have adopted and established the principle of extraterritorial application of its competition laws. In fact, interaction among the countries' competition authorities through international organizations and networks such as the OECD and the ICN is bringing the global convergence in competition law area. Many Korean companies engage in trade and commerce which affect overseas market including the US market. Where the US Department of Justice implements its strong policy of regulating international anti-competitive activities, Korean companies should be able to adopt their own measures to prevent and detect any possible violations of the US competition laws. For example, the companies may hold regular educational seminars on competition laws for the employees who engage in the US operations. The companies may also provide practical guidelines on what activities may or may not violate the US competition laws. In order to adopt these preventive measures, the companies will have to continually research and study the recent development of the US and the worlds' competition law area. The Korean Federal Trade Commission and any relevant academic associations also should be able to provide information and advice on competition law area.
참고문헌 (29)
- 김원기, "독점규제법" (2007), 대명출판사
- 서은숙, "독점금지법의 역외상용에 대한 비교법적 고찰: 역외 기업결합에 대한 규제를 중심으로", 박사, pp.2002
- 윤세리, "세계화 시대의 공정거래법의 방향", 저스티스, 통권 : 98 (2007)
- 이승현, "독점금지법의 역외적용에 관한 연구", 석사, pp.2003
- 이태명, "“플래시 메모리 가격담합 자진신고 - 삼성전자, 미엠네스티제도 활용.” 한국경제신문, 2007년 9월 19일", ~ (2007)
- "공정거래위원회 보도자료. “한?미 자유무역협정(FTA)관련 현안보고.” 2007년 4월 6일", ~ (2007)
- Hammond, Scott D., "“Recent Developments, Trends, and Milestones in The Antitrust Division's Criminal Enforcement Program,” Before the ABA Section of Antitrust Law Cartel Enforcement Roundtable 2007 Fall Forum, November 16, 2007 <http:", atr, pp.public, speeches[DOI]
- Kim, Sang Woo, "International Association of Korean Lawyers 13th Annual Conference, Seminar Material on “White Collar Crime,”" (2005)
- Wolfman, Brian, "“CAFA and the Effort to Defang Consumer Law,” May 8, 2007 <http:", tortdeform_com, pp.20070508, cafa_and_the_effort_to_defang_consumer_law>
- "“Comments Regarding the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act(“FTAIA”), 15 USC §6a,” ABA Section of Antitrust Law, February 8, 2006 <http:", antitrust, pp.at-comments, 2006[DOI]
- "The US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, “Antitrust Enforcement Guidelines for International Operation,” April 1, 1995", ~ (1995)
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division, “Corporate Leniency Policy issued August 10, 1993.”", ~ (1993)
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Overview, “Antitrust Enforcement and the Consumer: 3. How Are Antitrust Laws Enforced?” http:", atr, pp.public, div_stats[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Press Release, “British Airways plc and Korean Air Lines Co. Ltd. agree to plead guilty and pay criminal fines totaling $600 million for fixing prices on passenger and cargo flights,” August 1, 2007 <http:", atr, pp.public, press_releases[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Press Release, “Infineon Technologies AG agrees to plead guilty to participating in DRAM price-fixing conspiracy,” September 15, 2004 <http:", atr, pp.public, press_releases[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Press Release, “Japanese company agrees to plead guilty to participating in DRAM-price fixing conspiracy,” January 30, 2006? <http:", atr, pp.public, press_releases[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Press Release, “Korean company-Hynix-agrees to plead guilty to price fixing and agrees to pay $185Million fine for role in DRAM conspiracy,” April 21, 2005 <http:", atr, pp.public, press_
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Press Release, “SamSung agrees to plead guilty and to pay $300Million criminal fine for role in price fixing conspiracy,” October 13, 2005 <http:", atr, pp.public, press_releases[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division Public Documents, Criminal Enforcement, “Sherman Act Violations Yielding a Corporate Fine of $10 Million or More”, August 1, 2007 <http:", atr, pp.public, criminal[DOI]
- "US Department of Justice Antitrust Division, Public Documents, Guidelines and Policy Statements, “An Antitrust Primer for Federal Law Enforcement Personnel”, April 2005 <http:", atr, pp.public, guidelines[DOI]
- "Department of Justice Antitrust Division update Spring 2006 “Significant Events March 2005 - March 2006” <http:", atr, pp.public, 216254.htm>
- "ICN Homepage: About the ICN <http:", index.php, pp.en, about-icn>.?
- "OECD Homepage: Competition <http:", about, pp.0,3347,en_2649_37463_1_1_1_1_37463,00.html>
- "American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 US 347 (1909)", ~ (1909)
- "In re Massachusetts Bd. of Registration in Optometry, 110 F.T.C. 598, 609 (1988)", ~ (1988)
- "Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. California, 509 US 764 (1993)", ~ (1993)
- "United States v. Aluminum Co. of America, 148 F.2d 416 (2nd Cir. 1945)", ~ (1945)
- "United States v. Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd., 109 F.3d 1(1st Cir. 1997)", ~ (1997)
- "United States v. Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd., 944 F. Supp. 55 (D. Mass, 1996)", ~ (1996)