카르텔에 대한 징벌적 배상제도의 도입론 (Awarding Punitive Damages for Victims of Cartels)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국경쟁법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 경쟁법연구 / 29권 / 309 ~ 337페이지
· 저자명 : 김두진

초록

The purpose of this article is to determine whether awarding punitive damages for victims of cartels would be plausible and adequate under the Korea Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”) in the light of competition policy.
Cartels are considered to be one of the most serious breaches of competition law. And it is surely the most serious threat to competition and consumers. In Korea, cartel is prohibited by § 19 of the Fair Trade Act. Any contract, agreement, or commitment designed for cartels shall be null and void between relevant parties. If a cartel is detected, the Fair Trade Commission may order the enterprisers concerned to cease and discontinue such an act and may impose surcharges on the relevant enterprisers within the limits not exceeding the amount equivalent to 10/100 of the relevant turnover. However private plaintiffs could be entitled to recover only real harm caused by the cartel under the existing law. I think that amount be insufficient not only for the victims of cartels but also for the deterrence of future violations.
Part II of this Article briefly looks into the punitive damages generally: concept of punitive damages, history of adopting punitive damages. Globally, the common law countries such as USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and a few continental law countries such as Brazil and Norway, punitive damages are awarded to the victims to punish the wrong-doer and to deter that person and others from similar bad conduct in the future.
And then I shift my focus into the treble damages of U.S. federal antitrust laws.
Part Ⅲ analyses the function, history and purpose of the treble damages in U.S. federal antitrust laws and introduces policy debate about private enforcement of antitrust law.
In Part Ⅳ, I discuss on the plausibility and adequateness of awarding punitive damages for the victims of cartels under the Fair Trade Act. Article 35(2) of the Korea Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act has introduced treble damages for the victims of abuses of the acquired technical data by a principal contractor since 2011 revision. This is the first legislation of punitive damages in modern Korean law, and I regard it as a friendly experience for an introduction of punitive damages for victims of cartels in the Fair Trade Act. This is because the inconsistency with the Civil Code has been major obstacle for introduction of punitive damages into Korean law.
Finally, Part V concludes by offering positive policy suggestions that follow from my analysis.

영어초록

The purpose of this article is to determine whether awarding punitive damages for victims of cartels would be plausible and adequate under the Korea Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”) in the light of competition policy.
Cartels are considered to be one of the most serious breaches of competition law. And it is surely the most serious threat to competition and consumers. In Korea, cartel is prohibited by § 19 of the Fair Trade Act. Any contract, agreement, or commitment designed for cartels shall be null and void between relevant parties. If a cartel is detected, the Fair Trade Commission may order the enterprisers concerned to cease and discontinue such an act and may impose surcharges on the relevant enterprisers within the limits not exceeding the amount equivalent to 10/100 of the relevant turnover. However private plaintiffs could be entitled to recover only real harm caused by the cartel under the existing law. I think that amount be insufficient not only for the victims of cartels but also for the deterrence of future violations.
Part II of this Article briefly looks into the punitive damages generally: concept of punitive damages, history of adopting punitive damages. Globally, the common law countries such as USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and a few continental law countries such as Brazil and Norway, punitive damages are awarded to the victims to punish the wrong-doer and to deter that person and others from similar bad conduct in the future.
And then I shift my focus into the treble damages of U.S. federal antitrust laws.
Part Ⅲ analyses the function, history and purpose of the treble damages in U.S. federal antitrust laws and introduces policy debate about private enforcement of antitrust law.
In Part Ⅳ, I discuss on the plausibility and adequateness of awarding punitive damages for the victims of cartels under the Fair Trade Act. Article 35(2) of the Korea Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act has introduced treble damages for the victims of abuses of the acquired technical data by a principal contractor since 2011 revision. This is the first legislation of punitive damages in modern Korean law, and I regard it as a friendly experience for an introduction of punitive damages for victims of cartels in the Fair Trade Act. This is because the inconsistency with the Civil Code has been major obstacle for introduction of punitive damages into Korean law.
Finally, Part V concludes by offering positive policy suggestions that follow from my analysis.

참고자료

· 없음