Browse

Korean Antitrust for Proof of Price-Fixing: Comparative Analysis with the U.S. Antitrust

Cited 0 time in Web of Science Cited 0 time in Scopus
Authors
Choe, Chang-Su
Issue Date
2009
Publisher
BK 21 law
Citation
Journal of Korean Law, Vol.9 No.2, pp. 343-380
Keywords
Korean antitrustparallel pricing in Korea antitrustconscious parallelism in Korean antitrustKorean antitrustproof of price-fixingpresumption of agreement(s)
Abstract
Antitrust finds competitors’ price-fixing illegal per se. Parallel pricing among competitors has been frequently observable in daily economic lives, and it becomes more and more so by virtue of technological developments and globalization in the 21st century. The question is whether the evidence tells us unlawful price-fixing is occurring. Indeed, it is one of the most challenging questions in antitrust jurisprudence, requiring tight legal standards for deriving conspiratorial price-fixing from the evidence. This article addresses Korean and the U.S. antitrust approaches to this issue by identifying and evaluating their legal devices and reasoning processes in light of relevant comparable cases of the two antitrust authorities. It argues that more practical use of legal devices is necessary to the extent that parallel pricing phenomenon may be consistent with a legitimate explanation as with a collusive explanation. This article concludes that since procedural devices may functionally minimize mistaken conclusions based on ambiguous evidence, they should be carefully employed along with reasoned analysis for competitive harm.
ISSN
1598-1681
Language
English
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10371/85166
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Law/Law School (법과대학/대학원)The Law Research Institute (법학연구소) Journal of Korean LawJournal of Korean Law Volume 09 Number 1/2 (2009)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse