행정지도가 개입된 담합행위와 공정거래법의 적용제외(Exemption)제도에 관한 연구 -소주가격 담합사례를 중심으로- = A study of Administrative Guidance and Exemption Clause under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act: a price fixing of Soju case

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The FTC is currently condemning price-fixing of SOJU producers in Korea. This paper compares to the system of exemption regulation of EU, USA and Japan. The theoretical structure of the paper shows that the relations of the trade -off on between competition policy and industrial policy. The paper is organized as follows; A legal effect of Administrative Guidances within the exemption of antitrust law discussed in Section 2. Section 3 considers the system of Exemption Regulation on the types of EU, USA, Japan. The last section discusses harmonization of both competition policy and industry policy. Antitrust law instead of being limited to applying exemption. I think that exemption rules of Antitrust law buffers between competition policy and industry policy. However the regimes of exemption regulation in Korea do not allow; It thus occurs to the price-fixing of SOJU. As a consequence, The Korea Supreme Court has stated that administrative guidance automatically do not exempt antitrust law, which would exclude Justified Behaviorof §58(exemption). The important feature of the explicit exemption rules is that the type of USA and Japan. In contrast to the system of exemption rules of Japan is not an exemption from application under other individual laws in the system of exemption of Korea. Due to exemption regulation eliminates 1st amendment of Antitrust law. The aim of an exemption system, relieves trade-off of between competition policy and industry policy. The analysis above shows that the current of Exemption Regulations in EU, USA, and Japan is different to the system of Korea. The result of the study suggests that exemption applications under other individual laws through the revision of antitrust law.