지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
There are many statutes which regulate unfair trade practices in Korea. They Include not only the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act but also the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, the Consumer protection Act and so on, and among those Acts, the most fundamental act is the sec. 23 of the Monopoly regulation and Fair Trade Act. In fact, however, those Acts have never been efficient in regulating unfair trade practices due to the unsystematic structures, the ambiguous creteria and the lack of specific definitions, of them.
This thesis focuses on those problems above and tries to improve them by comparing the corresponding acts in the Germany.
This thesis deals with why the see, 23 about unfair trade practices is included in the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act whose main purpose is to promote fair and free "competition" even though unfair trade practices originally have been regulated in the Civil Law or the Criminal law. According to the study in the thesis, the process of legislative history in "the Monopoly Regulation" just explained why the sec. 23 about the unfair trade practices are regulated by the Monoploly Regulation.
Chapter 2 reviews the "Gesetz gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb" which regulate unfair methods of trade in Germany. This "Gesetz" is rather special law of civil law than competition law. And so it is desirable to distinguish this "Gesetz" from Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschrankungen(=Antitrust law of Germany), The crieteria of unfairness of certain practice is not against the competitive but against the good morals(=guten Sitten) or not.
Unfair trade practices in German include as many fundamental civil law provisions as possible for the effective and correct regulation of the unfair competitive practices while Korean law do not Include any criteria provision of fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. This means that German law hi to be applied to the unfair trade practices as correct as application of civil law principle.
Chapter 3 reviews the problems of sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of the R.O.K. According to it, the sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act do not include any criteria provision or fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. It means that many practices are regulated by economic policy rather than due course of justice. Therefore even natural crimes are apt to be omitted from the application of law in the name of recommendation of correction. When we try to improve this provision, it can be helpful to study the origin of it. Our legislation contain some useful and comprehensives.
Chapter 4 reviews the problems and the improvement plan of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of Korea. The sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. But in fact these Acts have never been efficient in regulating unfair trade practices very frequently in real trade due to the unsystematic structures, the ambiguous creteria, and the lack of specific definitions, in these Acts. The sec, 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of the Korea which regulates the unfair trade acts is one of the most frequently utilized provisions of the Act. This rule do and Include any criteria provision or fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. Korean law Is not only short in reflecting the unfair practices as it is but uncorrect in application for lack of fundamental civil law principles. It means that many practices are regulated by economic policy rather than due course of justice. Therefore even natural crimes are apt to be omitted from the application of law in the name of recommendation of correction.
As an alternative to solve those problems, I think It necessary to establish a new Act which will cover comprehensively unfair trade practices, including the sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation. Unfair Competition Prevention Act. Consumer Protection Act and so on. The primary purpose of the new Act is to regulate "unfairness" of trade practices in general. with an emphasis on private rlief of the consumer injured by those practices. In establishing the new Act. I think that the cases in UDAP Act of U. S. A. and the "Gesetz gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb" of Germany can be modeled. As for the execution of the new Act, It is required to decide upon where to give the power of execution, that is, to judiciary Authorities or Fair Trade Commission of Korea. In my opinion, however, it is desired to confer the execution power to Fair Trade Commission because of the in efficency of the judicial process in Korea. Additionally, in the new Act, the general clauses on civil law should be contained in. order to regulate unfair trade practices in the real trade market.
This thesis focuses on those problems above and tries to improve them by comparing the corresponding acts in the Germany.
This thesis deals with why the see, 23 about unfair trade practices is included in the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act whose main purpose is to promote fair and free "competition" even though unfair trade practices originally have been regulated in the Civil Law or the Criminal law. According to the study in the thesis, the process of legislative history in "the Monopoly Regulation" just explained why the sec. 23 about the unfair trade practices are regulated by the Monoploly Regulation.
Chapter 2 reviews the "Gesetz gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb" which regulate unfair methods of trade in Germany. This "Gesetz" is rather special law of civil law than competition law. And so it is desirable to distinguish this "Gesetz" from Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschrankungen(=Antitrust law of Germany), The crieteria of unfairness of certain practice is not against the competitive but against the good morals(=guten Sitten) or not.
Unfair trade practices in German include as many fundamental civil law provisions as possible for the effective and correct regulation of the unfair competitive practices while Korean law do not Include any criteria provision of fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. This means that German law hi to be applied to the unfair trade practices as correct as application of civil law principle.
Chapter 3 reviews the problems of sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of the R.O.K. According to it, the sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act do not include any criteria provision or fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. It means that many practices are regulated by economic policy rather than due course of justice. Therefore even natural crimes are apt to be omitted from the application of law in the name of recommendation of correction. When we try to improve this provision, it can be helpful to study the origin of it. Our legislation contain some useful and comprehensives.
Chapter 4 reviews the problems and the improvement plan of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of Korea. The sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. But in fact these Acts have never been efficient in regulating unfair trade practices very frequently in real trade due to the unsystematic structures, the ambiguous creteria, and the lack of specific definitions, in these Acts. The sec, 23 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act of the Korea which regulates the unfair trade acts is one of the most frequently utilized provisions of the Act. This rule do and Include any criteria provision or fundamental civil law provisions for the necessary interpretation and application of the law. Korean law Is not only short in reflecting the unfair practices as it is but uncorrect in application for lack of fundamental civil law principles. It means that many practices are regulated by economic policy rather than due course of justice. Therefore even natural crimes are apt to be omitted from the application of law in the name of recommendation of correction.
As an alternative to solve those problems, I think It necessary to establish a new Act which will cover comprehensively unfair trade practices, including the sec. 23 of the Monopoly Regulation. Unfair Competition Prevention Act. Consumer Protection Act and so on. The primary purpose of the new Act is to regulate "unfairness" of trade practices in general. with an emphasis on private rlief of the consumer injured by those practices. In establishing the new Act. I think that the cases in UDAP Act of U. S. A. and the "Gesetz gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb" of Germany can be modeled. As for the execution of the new Act, It is required to decide upon where to give the power of execution, that is, to judiciary Authorities or Fair Trade Commission of Korea. In my opinion, however, it is desired to confer the execution power to Fair Trade Commission because of the in efficency of the judicial process in Korea. Additionally, in the new Act, the general clauses on civil law should be contained in. order to regulate unfair trade practices in the real trade market.
목차
제Ⅰ장. 序說
제Ⅱ장. 獨逸의 不公正去來行爲制度
제Ⅲ장. 우리나라의 不公正去來行爲制度
제Ⅳ장. 不公正去來行爲規制의 問題點과 改善方案
제Ⅴ장. 結語
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
WTO 體制下의 韓國 貿易管理의 國際化를 위한 制度的 改善方案
한국항만경제학회지
1995 .07
-
하도급 불공정행위 사례를 통해 살펴본 조선산업의 문제점과 개선방안에 대한 연구
수산해양교육연구
2018 .04
-
WTO와 美國의 通商政策
한국항만경제학회지
1995 .07
-
貿易構造分析을 위한 分業理論과 技法에 관한 考察
한국항만경제학회지
1994 .08
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
-
Trade News
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
Trade News
비료회보
1993 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1992 .01
-
TRADE NEWS
비료회보
1993 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-326-014573040