Since the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreements (hereinafter “FTA”) was signed in 2007, it seemed to be inevitable to introduce consent order system in Korea. A consent order is a series of executive procedure expressing a voluntary agreement between two potential parties - a defendant being investigated especially for unfair trade practices and the government regulatory body - to a law suit. That is, without admitting guilt, the defendant might agree to cease the activities alleged by the government to be illegal, in return for closing the case. At the same time, the government might efficiently accomplish regulatory purposes thereby. This article tries to give some significant advices in introducing the institution of the “Consent order” in Korea from the standpoint of the domestic legal system. For that purpose, the article explores the definition, institutional characters and functions, and other relevant information of the consent order system. Given that inquiry, it discusses some issues and alternatives that should be considered in relation to the Bill for『Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act』on August 7, 2007. Specifically, the article maintains that the institutional advantages of “Consent order” should not wrongfully be taken as to be adding another arbitrary leverage to apply rules to the existing list of measures for government's intervention. It is necessary to deliberate the possibilities of moral hazard, unpredictability of the government affairs, or the government’s over-regulation problems which may follow the “Consent order” system. These problems, however, can be solved by existing rules or procedural-complements, such as making public the agreement reached between the parties or having a certain period of time seeking public comments related to the “Consent order”. In sum, the “Consent order” system should be introduced in Korea as a form that fits well into the domestic legal system. For that purpose, it is highly recommendable to refer to the “Consent order” practiced in the U.S., where the system originated from. The Bill『Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act』of 2007 proves to be by and large a very positive one, in which sets institutional devices to soften unexpected impacts of the new system. Nonetheless, there still remain some shortcomings, such as limitation of scope to apply “Consent order” and exclusion of a defendant’s right to advance opinions.

Since the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreements (hereinafter “FTA”) was signed in 2007, it seemed to be inevitable to introduce consent order system in Korea. A consent order is a series of executive procedure expressing a voluntary agreement between two potential parties - a defendant being investigated especially for unfair trade practices and the government regulatory body - to a law suit. That is, without admitting guilt, the defendant might agree to cease the activities alleged by the government to be illegal, in return for closing the case. At the same time, the government might efficiently accomplish regulatory purposes thereby. This article tries to give some significant advices in introducing the institution of the “Consent order” in Korea from the standpoint of the domestic legal system. For that purpose, the article explores the definition, institutional characters and functions, and other relevant information of the consent order system. Given that inquiry, it discusses some issues and alternatives that should be considered in relation to the Bill for『Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act』on August 7, 2007. Specifically, the article maintains that the institutional advantages of “Consent order” should not wrongfully be taken as to be adding another arbitrary leverage to apply rules to the existing list of measures for government's intervention. It is necessary to deliberate the possibilities of moral hazard, unpredictability of the government affairs, or the government’s over-regulation problems which may follow the “Consent order” system. These problems, however, can be solved by existing rules or procedural-complements, such as making public the agreement reached between the parties or having a certain period of time seeking public comments related to the “Consent order”. In sum, the “Consent order” system should be introduced in Korea as a form that fits well into the domestic legal system. For that purpose, it is highly recommendable to refer to the “Consent order” practiced in the U.S., where the system originated from. The Bill『Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act』of 2007 proves to be by and large a very positive one, in which sets institutional devices to soften unexpected impacts of the new system. Nonetheless, there still remain some shortcomings, such as limitation of scope to apply “Consent order” and exclusion of a defendant’s right to advance opinions.

Consent Order, Consent Decree