50 0

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.author이호영-
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-14T05:11:17Z-
dc.date.available2018-03-14T05:11:17Z-
dc.date.issued2014-05-
dc.identifier.citation상사법연구. 2014, 33(1), pg. 335-366, 32 p.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1226-3362-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ndsl.kr/ndsl/search/detail/article/articleSearchResultDetail.do?cn=ART001878760-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11754/46600-
dc.description.abstractVarious forms of information exchanges among competitors which enhance market transparency have potential harms to competition as well as possible pro-competitive effects. Main possible anti-competitive effects of information exchanges among competitors is its usage as an instrument for reaching and maintaining anti-competitive agreements among competitors. They also make anti-competitive tacit coordination among competitors more feasible particularly in oligopolistic markets without an explicit agreement. The Article 19 (1) of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (the MRFT Act) (Prohibiton of Unreasonable Concerted Actions) does not explicitly provides for prohibition of “concerted practices” as found in the Art 101 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union and in similar competition law statutes. On the ground of such ommission in the provision, some lower courts have held that stand-alone information exchanges cannot constitute a unreasonable concerted action as prohibited under the MRFT Act. In addition, some reviewing courts as well as the Korea Fair Trade Commission, the Korean competition authorities does not seem to be clearly aware of the distinction among theories of possible anti-competitive harms resulting from information exchanges among competitors. As a result, they failed to apply coherent and systematic criteria in evaluating information exchanges among competitors under the MRFT Act. The Supreme Court may hopefully get rid of such confusion and unclearness in appellate proceedings. Otherwise, prompt legislative improvement is in order.en_US
dc.description.sponsorship이 논문은 2013년도 정부재원(교육과학기술부 인문사회연구역량강화사업비)으로 한국연구재단의 지원(NRF-2013-S1A3A2053586) 및 한양대학교 교내연구지원사업(HY-2013년도)으로 연구되었습니다.en_US
dc.language.isoko_KRen_US
dc.publisher한국상사법학회en_US
dc.subject정보교환행위en_US
dc.subject경쟁법en_US
dc.subject부당한 공동행위en_US
dc.subject카르텔, 합의en_US
dc.subject묵시적 합의en_US
dc.subject동조적 행위en_US
dc.subjectinformation exchangeen_US
dc.subjectcompetition lawen_US
dc.subjectunreasonable concerted actionen_US
dc.subjectcartelen_US
dc.subjectagreementen_US
dc.subjecttacit conclusionen_US
dc.subjectconcerted practicesen_US
dc.title공정거래법상 경쟁자 간 정보교환행위의 평가에 관한 연구en_US
dc.title.alternativeA Study on the Evaluation of Information Exchanges among Competitors under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Acten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.relation.no1-
dc.relation.volume33-
dc.relation.page335-368-
dc.relation.journal상사법연구-
dc.contributor.googleauthor이호영-
dc.relation.code2014000770-
dc.sector.campusS-
dc.sector.daehakSCHOOL OF LAW[S]-
dc.sector.departmentHanyang University Law School-
dc.identifier.pidhoylee-
Appears in Collections:
SCHOOL OF LAW[S](법학전문대학원) > Hanyang University Law School(법학전문대학원) > Articles
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE