초록 열기/닫기 버튼
According to a corrective measure, the KFTC recognized a platform provider’s MFN request as an abuse of superior bargaining position, particularly an interfering with the business activities. These narratives, however, fail to account for a fundamental meaning of platforms’ MFN requests. To tell this meaning of actions, this Article examines JFTC’s enforcement, particularly the Amazon Japan Case. This Article looks to the provider’s MFN request from two perspectives, to provide a coherent synthesis of the intrinsic motivation. This Article applies the methodology of legal history to argue that KFTC could not approach to the issues from the perspective of the restriction on competition. This Article concludes that, in the light of the MFN request’s intrinsic function, to accommodate a regulatory gap may require reorganizing the law and regulations, particularly the Act on Fair Transactions in Large Retail Business.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
MFN, Unfair Trade Practices, Binding Conditional Trade, Platform, Act on Fair Transactions in Large Retail Business
