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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The KOREA-US Free Trade Agreement (hereinafter “KORUS FTA”) was signed in April 2007 between trade negotiating representatives, and is awaiting respective legislator’s recognition. Even though the issue of recognizing KORUS FTA by the National Assembly is still in deep political debate in Korea, the KORUS FTA will be a cornerstone, if it will be effectuated, that will lead both countries into the economic progress and joint prosperity.
This article is intended to provide the relationship between the FTAs and Competition Policy and the expectation about the prospective influence of KORUS FTA on the Korean competition legal system. The KORUS FTA Chapter Sixteen regulates the competition-related matters. The competition Chapter is composed of 9 articles. Among them, article 16.1 declares adopting, maintaining and applying competition measures to the anticompetitive business conduct. And Articles 16.2 and 16.3 admit room for the designated monopolies and the state enterprises. Article 16.5 guarantees transparency in the both Parties’ competition enforcement policies. And article 16.7 prescribes a consultation procedure to address specific matters that arise under competition Chapter.
The expansion of the relevant geographic market through KORUS FTA might have an effect on measuring anticompetitiveness. That is why, generally speaking, once the relevant geographic market would be defined larger, the possibility of acknowledging market power might lessen.
And the consent orders may be introduced into Korean competition legal system stimulated by KORUS FTA. The introduction of the consent orders will prompt the public enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly and Fair Trade Act and encourage the compensation for injured consumers.
The enforcement of KORUS FTA will raise the occurrence of the international competition law cases. Classifying the cases according to the anticompetitive issues included, two approaches could be adopted to solve the problem. In hard core cartel cases, the courts or competition law authorities of an affected Country may exercise jurisdiction over cartel behavior in Contracting Party, applying domestic competition Law. Differently, in cases not involving hard-core cartels, comity factors should be applied to require the courts or competition law authorities of an affected Country to abstain from exercising extraterritorial competition law jurisdiction over anticompetitive conduct in Contracting Party.
This article is intended to provide the relationship between the FTAs and Competition Policy and the expectation about the prospective influence of KORUS FTA on the Korean competition legal system. The KORUS FTA Chapter Sixteen regulates the competition-related matters. The competition Chapter is composed of 9 articles. Among them, article 16.1 declares adopting, maintaining and applying competition measures to the anticompetitive business conduct. And Articles 16.2 and 16.3 admit room for the designated monopolies and the state enterprises. Article 16.5 guarantees transparency in the both Parties’ competition enforcement policies. And article 16.7 prescribes a consultation procedure to address specific matters that arise under competition Chapter.
The expansion of the relevant geographic market through KORUS FTA might have an effect on measuring anticompetitiveness. That is why, generally speaking, once the relevant geographic market would be defined larger, the possibility of acknowledging market power might lessen.
And the consent orders may be introduced into Korean competition legal system stimulated by KORUS FTA. The introduction of the consent orders will prompt the public enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly and Fair Trade Act and encourage the compensation for injured consumers.
The enforcement of KORUS FTA will raise the occurrence of the international competition law cases. Classifying the cases according to the anticompetitive issues included, two approaches could be adopted to solve the problem. In hard core cartel cases, the courts or competition law authorities of an affected Country may exercise jurisdiction over cartel behavior in Contracting Party, applying domestic competition Law. Differently, in cases not involving hard-core cartels, comity factors should be applied to require the courts or competition law authorities of an affected Country to abstain from exercising extraterritorial competition law jurisdiction over anticompetitive conduct in Contracting Party.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 한미 FTA상의 경쟁 장의 내용
Ⅲ. 전망: 한미 FTA가 국내 경쟁법제에 미칠 영향
Ⅳ. 결어
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Korea-U.S. FTA in its Third Year: Current Status of Implementation and Issues
[KIEP] World Economy Brief
2015 .09
-
한미 FTA 발효 이후 양국 간 무역 분쟁 해결의 절차에 대한 연구
관세학회지
2011 .12
-
한ㆍ미 자유무역협정 섬유 및 의류산업 원산지 규정에 대한 고찰
통상정보연구
2008 .09
-
한미 FTA 발효 이후 앙국 간 무역 분쟁 해결의 절차에 대한 연구
한국관세학회 학술대회
2011 .12
-
동아시아 지역중심 FTA의 한계와 한미 FTA로의 통상정책 전환 : 노무현 행정부 시기를 중심으로
사회과학연구
2012 .03
-
한미 FTA 개정 협상과 활용에 관한 섬유 · 의류분야 사례 연구
관세학회지
2020 .02
-
한ㆍ미 FTA상 경쟁관련 분야 및 동의의결제
법과기업연구
2012 .06
-
전문경영인 관점에서의 한·미 FTA 개정에 따른 대응방안
전문경영인연구
2017 .01
-
韓美 FTA 이후 公正去來法의 과제
저스티스
2007 .06
-
한미 FTA 협정문 제18장 저작권법의 형사정책적 고려
동아법학
2012 .02
-
한·미 FTA 체결이 경쟁정책에 미칠 영향에 관한 검토
법학연구
2012 .12
-
한·미 FTA 바로 알기 2006
[KIEP] 연구보고서
2006 .05
-
한미 FTA 발효 후 무역구조 변화에 대한 분석
통상정보연구
2018 .03
-
Are the stock markets really responding to news on the FTA?: Event Study on Korea-US FTA
무역학회지
2020 .08
-
미국 기업의 한-미 FTA 활용인식과 활용성과에 관한 실증연구
관세학회지
2016 .12
-
한미FTA의 국방분야 영향 평가
국제경제법연구
2007 .12
-
FTA 정보시스템 활용능력과 FTA활용의사와의 관계 분석
전자무역연구
2015 .01
-
FTA 체결국 제품의 구매의도 결정요인
무역연구
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000474995