RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      한국(韓國) 독점규제법(獨占規制法)의 역외적용(域外適用) -항공화물(航空貨物) 국제(國際)cartel 사건(事件)을 중심(中心)으로- = Extraterritorial Application of Anti-Monopoly and Fair Trade Law

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      In according to the general principle of international jurisdiction, the national law of each country can be applied in the territory of each country. The extraterritorial enforcement of law can be tolerated only in the exception. It`s application is only extended into another country`s territory when it can be justified objectively. The American competition authorities permit the application of US competition law to foreign actors where the latter`s conduct could be seen to have a ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect on US commerce. The extraterritorial application of competition law has been also admitted in EU and other advanced countries. In Korea, Fair Trade Commission began to apply the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act to foreign actors in 2002. The Law adopted the provision which allows the extraterritorial application through its amendment in 2004. Seoul High Court also admitted the extraterritorial application of competition law in 2004 and the Supreme Court confirmed the extraterritorial application in 2006. Nowadays, the Korean FTC tends to extend more actively the extraterritorial application of competition law. However it is very controversial that KFTC tends to apply the Korean Anti-monopoly act to foreign actors without careful test of ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect on Korean commerce. In the international cargo cartel cases in 2010, KFTC applied also the Korean Anti-monopoly law to foreign cargo companies without careful check of ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect. These cases are now pending at the Seoul High Court. The author of this article made criticism to the current tendency of KFTC in the extraterritorial application and suggests for KFTC to review its conditions more carefully in the future.
      번역하기

      In according to the general principle of international jurisdiction, the national law of each country can be applied in the territory of each country. The extraterritorial enforcement of law can be tolerated only in the exception. It`s application is ...

      In according to the general principle of international jurisdiction, the national law of each country can be applied in the territory of each country. The extraterritorial enforcement of law can be tolerated only in the exception. It`s application is only extended into another country`s territory when it can be justified objectively. The American competition authorities permit the application of US competition law to foreign actors where the latter`s conduct could be seen to have a ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect on US commerce. The extraterritorial application of competition law has been also admitted in EU and other advanced countries. In Korea, Fair Trade Commission began to apply the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act to foreign actors in 2002. The Law adopted the provision which allows the extraterritorial application through its amendment in 2004. Seoul High Court also admitted the extraterritorial application of competition law in 2004 and the Supreme Court confirmed the extraterritorial application in 2006. Nowadays, the Korean FTC tends to extend more actively the extraterritorial application of competition law. However it is very controversial that KFTC tends to apply the Korean Anti-monopoly act to foreign actors without careful test of ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect on Korean commerce. In the international cargo cartel cases in 2010, KFTC applied also the Korean Anti-monopoly law to foreign cargo companies without careful check of ``direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable`` effect. These cases are now pending at the Seoul High Court. The author of this article made criticism to the current tendency of KFTC in the extraterritorial application and suggests for KFTC to review its conditions more carefully in the future.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼