온라인 플랫폼 사업자와 이용자 간 상생협력 촉진 방안 (Promoting Collaboration between On-line Platforms and Users)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국유통학회
· 수록지 정보 : 유통연구 / 27권 / 1호 / 111 ~ 146페이지
· 저자명 : 임영균, 정수정

초록

디지털기술의 비약적 발전과 코로나 팬데믹에 의한 비대면경제로의 급속한 전환은 온라인 플랫폼 기업의 성장을 가속화하고 있다. 하지만 온라인 플랫폼 기업의 시장지배력 강화는 과도한 수수료 부과 등의 여러 불공정거래행위를 낳고 있으며 소위 플랫폼 생태계 구축을 위한 이종사업으로의 영역확대는 중소기업과 소상공인의 생존을 위협하는 것으로 여겨지고 있다.
온라인 플랫폼 기업의 시장지배적 지위남용과 불공정거래행위를 규제해야 한다는 목소리는 국내는 물론 유럽과 미국 등 여러 국가에서도 나오고 있으며 정부 주도의 강력한 규제가 검토되고 있다. 현재 국회에 계류 중인 「온라인 플랫폼 공정화법」 제정안과 「상생협력법」 개정안은 이러한 흐름을 반영하고 있다. 하지만 정부 규제는 급변하는 시장상황을 그때그때 신속히 반영하지 못한다는 문제를 안고 있다. 규제의 전제조건인 명확한 시장획정과 불공정거래행위의 사실관계나 그 효과에 대한 검증이 어려울 뿐만 아니라 온라인 플랫폼이 거래의 효율성이나 소비자후생의 제고에 일정부분 기여하고 있다는 점도 무시하기 어렵다. 설령 강력한 법적 규제가 온라인 플랫폼 기업과 이용자 간 거래의 공정성을 담보할 수 있게 하더라도 이것이 이들 간의 갈등을 바람직한 방향으로 해결하고 상생협력을 도모할 수 있게 하는가는 의문이다.
상생협력의 본질은 다양성과 조화의 추구다. 건강하고 지속 가능한 기업 생태계는 대기업과 중소기업이 협력하여 각자의 역량을 개발하고 상호 신뢰를 구축함으로써 성취할 수 있다. 본 연구는 온라인 플랫폼 기업이 갈등의 현실을 극복하고 혁신동력으로 지속 가능한 성장을 성취하기 위해서는 법적 규제에 순응하는 것도 필요하지만 플랫폼 기업 스스로 자율규제를 통해 선제적으로 대응하는 것이 중요하다는 것을 강조하고 있다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 온라인 플랫폼 기업에 대해 자기지배 혹은 자율규제의 적극 도입을 권고하고 있다. 특히 이용자와의 상호의존적인 관계에서 신의성실의 원칙에 입각해 거래의 형평성과 공정성을 꾀하는 한편, 갈등이 발생하면 협력에 의해 건설적인 해결을 모색하고, 갈등 해결의 유효한 방안으로 자율분쟁조정제도를 신속히 도입할 것을 권고하고 있다. 나아가 단순히 이용자나 보완자와의 상생협력만이 아니라 사회 전체의 이익을 위해 온라인 플랫폼 기업이 사회적 책임을 발굴하고 실천해야 하는 것으로 보고 있다.

영어초록

The disruptive development of digital technology and the rapid transition to a non-face-to-face economy caused by Corona Pandemic are accelerating the growth of online platforms. However, the market dominance of online platform companies leads to various unfair trade practices such as excessive fees, and the expansion into diverse business areas to build a platform ecosystem is considered to threaten the survival of small and medium-sized enterprises and small business owners.
There are voices calling for regulating the abuse of market dominance and unfair trade practices of online platform companies in Korea as well as in Europe and the United States, and strong government-led regulations are under consideration. The enactment of the Online Platform Fairness Act and the revision of the Mutually Beneficial Cooperation Act, which are currently pending in the National Assembly, reflect this trend. However, government regulations have a problem that they cannot quickly reflect the rapidly changing market conditions. Not only is it difficult to clearly define the market, which is a prerequisite for regulation, and to verify the facts and effects of unfair trade practices, but it is also difficult to ignore the fact that online platforms contribute to the improvement of transaction efficiency and consumer welfare. Even if strong legal regulations can ensure fairness in transactions between online platform companies and their users, it is questionable whether this can resolve conflicts in a desirable direction and promote the collaboration among conflicting parties.
The intrinsic nature of collaboration is the pursuit of diversity and harmony. A healthy and sustainable business ecosystem can be achieved by both large companies and SMEs collaborating to develop their own capabilities and build mutual trust. To this end, this study suggests the self-governance or self-regulation for online platform companies. In particular, it is believed that platform companies, based on the principle of ‘good faith’, should seek equity and fairness in their relations with users and quickly introduce in-house dispute mediation programs for resolving conflicts. Furthermore, beyond the collaboration with users or complementors, it is believed that platform companies should develop and practice social responsibility for the interests of society at large. More specifically, the suggestions of this study are as follows.
First, based on the social interdependence theory and Deutsch’s theory of competition and cooperation, this study believes that the essence of collaborative (win-win) cooperation lies in harmony or balance between heterogeneous economic actors, and in order to achieve this in a conflict situation, it is necessary to seek cooperative-constructive conflict resolution rather than competitive-destructive conflict resolution. However, it is necessary to seek harmony between competition and cooperation in that it is possible to simultaneously pursue competition and cooperation, and fair competition or restrained competition can have positive results.
Second, following Gorwa (2019)’s suggestion, this study also sees the appropriate balance between the self-governance, external governance, and co-governance as a good form of platform governance. In particular, as government authorities are strongly considering legal regulations, platforms are expected to strengthen self-regulation, establish an organization performing multiple functions ranging from investigating user complaints to creating ethical frameworks, seek user participation in policy decisions, and so on.
Third, if a platform company wants to practice self-regulation, it must be made in the direction of complying with the ‘principle of good faith’ as in general transactions. The principle of good faith is closely related to the duty of cooperation, the doctrine of non-degradation from grant, and the principle of unconscionability. The core concepts that make up these principles include honesty, fairness, reasonableness, exclusion of bad faith and opportunism, compliance with fiduciary duty, respect of the other party’s rational expectations, and the implementation of community standards.
Fourth, it is desirable to preemptively and quickly introduce an in-house dispute mediation program to resolve conflicts. Both the enactment of the Online Platform Fairness Act and the revision of the Mutually Beneficial Cooperation Act stipulate the operation of the public dispute mediation program as a means for resolving disputes between platforms and their users. In-house dispute mediation is a ‘low risk coordinative mechanism’ compared to public dispute mediation, which contributes to improving relations between disputing parties and enhances corporate reputation and image. In addition, it is a more efficient and flexible conflict resolution method in that new measures not recognized by the parties can be sought during the mediation process.
Finally, platform companies’ collaboration efforts should be made in relation to consumers and society. The concept of collaborative cooperation requires platform companies to participate in solving social and environmental problems. It is necessary to consider how to impose responsibility on the platform and its various stakeholders to realize public values such as transparency and diversity.

참고자료

· 없음