공정거래법상 동의명령제 도입방안 연구 = Introducing Consent Order into the Korea Anti-Monopoly and Fair Trade Act

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The KOREA-US Free Trade Agreement (hereinafter “KORUS FTA”) was signed on 4 April 2007 between trade negotiating representatives, and is awaiting respective legislator’s recognition. The KORUS FTA Chapter Sixteen (so-called Competition Chapter) is composed of 9 articles. Among them, the article 16.1(5) declares “Each Party shall provide its authorities responsible for the enforcement of its national competition laws with the authority to resolve an administrative or civil enforcement action by mutual agreement with the subject of such an enforcement action. A Party may provide for such agreement to be subject to judicial approval.” This mutual agreement makes reference to the consent order. The antitrust consent orders are kind of the law enforcement measures and very flexible legal device through the negotiation between the antitrust authority and offending enterprises. In the USA, the majority of antitrust cases were settled by consent orders. Under the current Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”) in Korea, there are only unilateral corrective measures, including cease and desist order and surcharge order. In this study, I researched the FTC’s consent order and the DOJ’s consent decree procedure and several cases which were settled by negotiation through prescribed consent order scheme in the USA. And the commitment decision
procedure in the EU, the Verpflichtungszusagen procedure in the Germany, and the consent adjudication procedure in the Japan were considered, too. This article affirms the necessity of the introducing consent order into our
current scheme and seeks to find the proper legislation method of it. To avoid the abuse of power by the Korea Fair Trade Commission (hereinafter “KFTC”), I suggest some recommendations for legislature as follows:
Firstly, The exclusion of all cartels from consent order's scope is not appropriate. At least, the consent order should apply to the types of cartels that should be treated under the rule of reason. However where the degree of violations is so obvious and considerable, it should be excluded and to be treated regularly.
Secondly, Accepting public comments and conferences with relevant authorities are necessary before entering into consent orders. Thirdly, the judicial review of public interest is unnecessary to the consent
order by the KFTC, which is not an independent regulatory body as the FTC but has different feature from the ordinary government ministries, being a quasi-judiciary and quasi-legislative body. The great weight should be put on the independence and expertise of the KFTC. Fourthly, all main opinions and final decisions will be in principle made public via the internet home page in order to accept the public comment. Lastly and not the least, Where the facts which the consent order is based on are false, misrepresented or manipulated, the consent orders should be cancelled through litigations. The reopening should be available for the competition authority and the defendant enterprises to modify the consent orders where necessitated by changed conditions of law or fact, or as required in the public interest.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. 미국의 동의명령제
• Ⅲ. 미국 동의명령의 사례
• Ⅳ. 주요외국의 유사제도
• Ⅴ. 타 법리와의 정합성 검토
• Ⅵ. 공정거래법상 동의명령제 도입방안
• Ⅶ. 맺음말

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박길준, "한국독점규제법" 삼영사 1983

2 한철수, "한ㆍ미 FTA 이후 공정거래법의 과제" 2007

3 이기수, "제칠판 경제법" 세창출판사 2006

4 권오승, "제6판 경제법" 법문사 2008

5 이남기, "제3개정판 경제법" 박영사 2001

6 김두진, "미국 경쟁당국의 사건처리절차-동의명령제-, in: 공정거래법 집행의 선진화 - 한미FTA체결에 즈음하여-" 한국법제연구원 115-143, 2007

7 고동수, "동의명령제 도입과 기업환경 개선" 산업연구원 (335) : 2007

8 정환, "동의명령제" 한국경쟁법학회 18 : 117-172, 2008

9 이호영, "독점규제법의 이론과 실무" 홍문사 2006

10 홍명수, "공정위 사건처리절차의 효율화를 위한 개선 방안" 한국경쟁법학회 13 : 251-291, 2006

11 김두진, "공정거래법상 부당한 공동행위 자진신고자 감면제도" 한국상사판례학회 21 (21): 73-106, 2008

12 홍준형, "공정거래법상 동의명령제 도입방안에 대한 연구" 한국기업법학회 21 (21): 86-114, 2007

13 김영호, "경제법신론" 팔마도서 2000

14 양명조, "경제법강의(제7판)" 신조사 2009

15 신현윤, "경제법 [제2판]" 법문사 2007

16 손주찬, "경제법" 법경출판사 1994

17 정호열, "경제법" 박영사 2005

18 박세일, "개정판 법경제학" 박영사 2001

19 신영수, "美國 獨占禁止法上의 同意命令制度에 관한 考察" 한국기업법학회 19 (19): 489-516, 2005

20 김차동, "獨占規制法上 同意命令制度 導入方案에 관한 硏究" 법학연구소 24 (24): 485-504, 2007

21 조성국, "獨占規制法 事件의 合意解決에 대한 國際動向과 示唆點" 중앙법학회 8 (8): 349-379, 2006

22 MacAvoy, Paul W., "Winning By Losing: The AT & T Settlement and Its Impact on Telecommunications" 1 : 1-, 1983

23 Anderson, L., "United States v. Microsoft, Antitrust Consent Decrees, and the Need for a Proper Scope of Judicial Review" 65 : 1-, 1996

24 Elhauge, Einer R., "United States Antitrust Law and Economics" Foundation Press 2008

25 Avery, Janet L., "The Struggle Over Performing Rights to Music: BMI and ASCAP vs. Cable Television" 14 : 47-, 1991

26 Fox, Eleanor M., "The Politics of Law and Economics in Judicial Decision Making: Antitrust as a Window" 61 : 554-, 1986

27 Comment, "The Packer Consent Decree" 42 : 81-, 1932

28 Easterbrook, Frank H., "The Limits of Antitrust" 63 : 1-, 1984

29 Sullivan, Lawrence A., "The Law of Antitrust: An Integrated Handbook, 2nd ed." West 2006

30 Note, "The ITT Dividend: Reform of Department of Justice Consent Decree Procedures" 73 : 594-, 1973

31 Blaisdell, Thomas C., "The Federal Trade Commission. An Experiment in the Control of Business" The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. 2008

32 Clarkson, Kenneth W., "The Federal Trade Commission since 1970: Economic Regulation and Bureaucratic Behavior" Cambridge University Press 1981

33 Hovenkamp, Herbert, "The Antitrust and American Law: 1836-1937" West 1991

34 Rosenblum, Mark C., "The Antitrust Rationale for the MFJ’s Line-of-Business Restrictions and a Policy Proposal for Revising Them" 25 : 605-, 1996

35 Noll, Roger G., "The Anticompetitive Use of Regulation : United States v. AT & T in : The Antitrust Revolution"

36 Enis, Ben M., "The AT & T Settlement: Legal Summary, Economic Analysis, and Marketing Implications" 49 : 127-, 1985

37 MacAvoy Paul W., "Losing By Judicial Policymaking: The First Year of the AT & T Divestiture" 2 : 225-, 1985

38 Emmerich, Volker, "Kartellrecht: Ein Studienbuch, 11. Aufl." Beck Juristischer Verlag 2008

39 Noonan, J., "Judicial Review of Antitrust Consent Decrees: Reconciling Judicial Responsibility with Executive Discretion" 35 : 133-, 1983

40 Hillman, Noel L., "Intractable Consent: A Legislative Solution to the Problem of the Aging Consent Decrees in United States v. ASCAP and United States v. BMI" 8 : 733-, 1998

41 Einhorn, Michael A., "Intellectual Property and Antitrust: Music Performing Rights in Broadcasting" 24 (24): 349-, 2001

42 Carstensen, Peter C., "How to Assess the Impact of Antitrust on the American Economy: Examinining History or Theorizing?" 74 : 1175-, 1989

43 Goyder, Joanna, "Goyder’s EC Competition Law, 5th ed." OUP Oxford 2009

44 Kearney, Joseph D., "From the Fall of the Bell System to the Telecommunications Act: Regulation of Telecommunications Under Judge Greene" 50 (50): 1404-, 1999

45 Rittner, "Fritz, Wettbewerbs- und Kartellrecht, 6 Aufl." C. F. Müller 1999

46 Note, "Flexibility and Finality in Antitrust Consent Decrees" 80 : 1303-, 1967

47 Kanwit, Stephanie W., "Federal Trade Commission [Transfer Binder]"

48 Williamson, James R., "Federal Antitrust Policy During the Kennedy-Johnson Years"

49 Hovenkamp, Herbert, "Federal Antitrust Policy : The Law of Competition and its Practice, 3rd. ed." West 2004

50 김두진, "FTA와 경쟁정책 －한미 FTA상의 경쟁 장의 내용 및 국내법제에 미칠 영향을 중심으로－" 한양법학회 (25) : 49-74, 2009

51 Abel, Jaison R., "Entry into Regulated Monopoly Markets: The Development of a Competitive Fringe in the Local Telephone Industry" 45 : 289-, 2002

52 Sullivan, Lawrence, "Ellusive Goals Under the Telecommunications Act : Preserving Long Distance Competition Upon Baby Bell Entry and Attaining Local Exchange Competition: We’ll Not Preserve the One Unless We Attain the Other" 25 : 487-, 1996

53 Drexl, Josef, "Economic Theory and Competition Law" Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd 2009

54 Dabbah, Maher M., "EC and UK Competition Law: Commentary, Cases and Materials"

55 Jones, Alison, "EC Competition Law: Text, Cases, and Materials, 3rd ed." Oxford University Press 2008

56 Crandall, Robert W., "Does Antitrust Policy Improve Consumer Welfare? Assessing the Evidence.Find More Like This" 17 : 3-, 2003

57 Antitrust Division, "Department of Justice. Comment, The 1982 AT&T Consent Decree-Strengthening The Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act" 27 : 1611-, 1984

58 Blizzard, Paula L., "Consent Decree Standard of Review: United States v. Microsoft Corporation" 13 : 355-, 1998

59 Ewing Jr., Ky P., "Competition Rules for the 21st Century: Principles from America’s Experience" 2003

60 Whish, Richard, "Competition Law, 6th ed." Oxford University Press 2008

61 Furse, Mark, "Competition Law of the EC and UK, 6th ed." Oxford 2008

62 Roth QC, Peter, "Bellamy & Child, European Community Law of Competition, 2009 ed." Oxford University Press 2009

63 Gavil, Andrew I., "Antitrust Law in Perspective: Cases, Concepts and Problems in Competition Policy, 2nd ed." West 2008

64 ABA, "Antitrust Developments, 6th ed." 2007

65 Epstein, Richard A., "Antitrust Consent Decrees in Theory and Practice: Why Less Is More" The AEI Press 2007

66 Areeda, Phillip, "Antitrust Analysis: Problems, Text, and Cases, 6th ed." Aspen Publishers 2004

67 Hausman, Jerry A., "A Consumer-Welfare Approach to the Mandatory Unbundling of Telecommunications Networks" 109 : 417-, 1999

68 권재열, "4정판 경제법" 법원사 2005