독점금지법상의 형사제재
Criminal sanctions in the Antitrust Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this article, Professor Hayashi Mikito of the most recent publication of the paper is related to economic crimes. Japan has been performed Antitrust Law since 1947. However, for the penalty provisions were never applied since the law(Antitrust Law) was practiced. Penalty provision is dormant for 30 years and finally asked in 1980 the High Court ruling applies to the first. This article is written in the wake of this decision. Japan's Antimonopoly Act was accepted in the United States Sherman Act. Sherman Act, like Japan, have been imposed penalties to Monopoly and trade restrictions. Sherman Act's has imposed the penalty more frequently than Japan. However, Sherman Act of punishment has been changed in recent years. It summed up the expansion of criminal penalties. In this paper I will introduce these new movements. And apply penalties in the antitrust laws is to reflections on. This paper is composed as follows : (Ⅱ) I will overview that the history of Sherman Act's punishment. The Act is being operated will be examined. (Ⅲ) This chapter, I will study why Sherman Act's penalty could not be actively applies until recently, for reasons will be discussed. Also Packer as its centerpiece a look at the characteristics of white-collar crime. And for this part should also review the situation in Japan. (Ⅳ) I will be reviewed the inflation and about the relationship between antitrust policy. And on this point is to introduce the situation of the United States. (Ⅴ) This chapter, for the clarity of criminal punishment is to be studied.
Abstract
In this article, Professor Hayashi Mikito of the most recent publication of the paper is related to economic crimes. Japan has been performed Antitrust Law since 1947. However, for the penalty provisions were never applied since the law(Antitrust Law) was practiced. Penalty provision is dormant for 30 years and finally asked in 1980 the High Court ruling applies to the first. This article is written in the wake of this decision. Japan's Antimonopoly Act was accepted in the United States Sherman Act. Sherman Act, like Japan, have been imposed penalties to Monopoly and trade restrictions. Sherman Act's has imposed the penalty more frequently than Japan. However, Sherman Act of punishment has been changed in recent years. It summed up the expansion of criminal penalties. In this paper I will introduce these new movements. And apply penalties in the antitrust laws is to reflections on. This paper is composed as follows : (Ⅱ) I will overview that the history of Sherman Act's punishment. The Act is being operated will be examined. (Ⅲ) This chapter, I will study why Sherman Act's penalty could not be actively applies until recently, for reasons will be discussed. Also Packer as its centerpiece a look at the characteristics of white-collar crime. And for this part should also review the situation in Japan. (Ⅳ) I will be reviewed the inflation and about the relationship between antitrust policy. And on this point is to introduce the situation of the United States. (Ⅴ) This chapter, for the clarity of criminal punishment is to be studied.
참고문헌 (31)
- Arnold, "Antitrust Law Enforcement, Past and Future", Law & Contemp. Prob, 7(5), pp.16~ (1940)
- Baker, "To Indict or not to Indict: Prosecutorial Discretion in Sherman Act Enforcement", Cornell L. Rev, 63 (1978)
- Berge, "Remedies Available to the Government Under the Sherman Act", Law & Contemp. Prob, 7(104) (1940)
- Breit, "Antitrust penalties and attitudes toward risk: an economic analysis", Harv. L.Rev, 86 (1973)
- Cahill, "Must We Brand American Business by Indictment as Criminals?", ABA Antitrust Section, 1(26) (1952)
- David Eckert, "Sherman Act Sentencing: An Empirical Study, 1971-1979", Jour. Crim. L, 71(244) (1980)
- E. Sutherland, "White Collar Crime" (1949)
- Flynn, "Criminal Sanctions under State and Federal Antitrust Laws", Tex. L. Rev, 45 (1966)
- Handler, "Antitrust-Myth and Reality in an Inflation Era", N.Y.U.L. Rev, 50 (1975)
- Kadish, "Some Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing Economic Regulation", U. Chi. L. Rev, 30 (1963)
- Kaysen, "An Economist as the Judge's Law Clerk in Sherman act Cases", ABA Antitrust Section, 12(43) (1958)
- Klaus Tiedemann, "Kartellrechtsverstӧβe und Strafrecht" (1976)
- Kramer, "Criminal Prosecutions for Violations of the Sherman Act: In Search of a Policy", Georgetown L.J, 48
- Mercurio, "Antitrust Crimes: Time For Legislative Definition", Norte Dame L, 51 (1976)
- Posner, "A Statistical Study of Antitrust Enforcement", J.L.& Econ., 13(385)
- Packer, "The Limits of the Criminal Sanction" (1968)
- Renfrew, "The Paper Label Sentences: An Evaluation", Yale L.J, 86 (1977)
- 林幹人, "現代の經濟犯罪" (1989), 弘文堂
- 芝原邦爾, "刑法の社會的機能" (1972)
- 鈴木滿, "課徵金制度の運用狀況と問題點", 商事法務, 883 (1980)
- 根岸哲, "違法カルテルに對する課徵金制度", 法律時報, 49(11) (1977)
- 屋宮憲夫, "公正取引委員會の審査手續の適正化について", 上智大學修士論文
- 板倉宏, "石油やみカルテル事件刑事判決の意義と問題點", ジュリスト, (729) (1980)
- 福田平, "石油やみ事件判決の問題點", 商事法務, (894) (1981)
- 神山敏雄, "經濟刑法における保護法益", Law school, (29) (1981)
- 小原喜雄, "判例評論", 判例時報, (1016) (1981)
- 坪內利彦, "米國における獨禁法刑事罰適用の實情", 法律ひろ, 28(12) (1975)
- 京藤哲久, "アメリカにおけるカルテルの刑法的規制", 明治學院論叢―法學硏究, (30) (1984)
- 加藤直隆, "米國シャマン法刑事違反における意圖の要件 ― ジプサム判決を中心として", 法學紀要, 28 (1987)
- 芝原邦爾, "獨占禁止法違反の罪(1)(2)", 法律時報, 58(6) (1986)
- 池田紀子, "アメリカにおけるクラスアクシヨンの實情― その(3)(上)", ジュリスト, (733) (1981)