earticle

논문검색

우리나라 부정경쟁행위 유형의 한계에 대한 고찰 - 우버(UBER) 서비스 사례를 중심으로 -

원문정보

A Study on Limitations of Korean Unfair Competition Forms - Focused on Uber Case -

박윤석

피인용수 : 0(자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)

초록

영어

Uber is a mobile-app-based transportation network. Uber provide a service which allows consumers to submit a trip request, which is routed to crowd-sourced taxi drivers. It is sometimes more useful than Taxi, so Uber expanded internationally. Meanwhile, Uber meet with resistance. While taxi drivers are regulated by administrative regulation like the license system, drivers using Uber app are able to avoid some regulations in providing similar service like taxi. By ignoring the law, Uber is putting at risk the livelihoods taxi drivers who drive safely and follow the rules. some lawsuits filed against Uber in several countries for unfair competition, because Uber took competition advantage by breach of law against competitors who follow the law. Especially, Berlin district court make a decision Uber is an unfair competition because Uber violated PASSENGER TRANSPORT SERVICE ACT. There are many arguments about Uber’s unfair competition in the world but there is no arguments about Uber’s unfair competition in Korea. The Korean Unfair Competition Law(KUCL) has recognised only ten types of acts as unfair competition. When some acts outside of KUCL are regarded as unfair competition, they are just de facto unfair competition acts. They are allowed, if they are not prohibited by civil law(tort) or other special laws. Ten types of acts in KUCL protect mostly an individual competitor. KUCL do not aim to protect consumer and public interest by comparison with unfair competition law of foreign country, for instance Germany. Unfair competition acts which infringe the consumer or public interest are not covered by KUCL but they exist as de facto unfair competition acts outside of it. A typical unfair competition act infringing public interest is the breach of law. The breach of law means that the violation of a law is used for method of competition. In comparison with EU countries and US, the breach of law has been recognized as unfair competition. In particular, the breach of law was codified Article 4 Nr.11(Rechtsbruch) in Unfair competition Act of Germany. According to Rechtsbruch, the infringement of regulation outside of Unfair competition Act of Germany can be considered as unfair competition if the infringed regulation is intended to regulate market conduct in the interest of market participants. But it is just de facto unfair competition act in KUCL. Tradespeople violates provisons outside of KUCL to gain an advantage in competition. This unfair competition infringes public consensus that competitor must compliance with all rules and be lawful. It is general requirements for commercial behavior. If the breach of law as an unfair competition happens frequently, public oder is threatened in the worst case. So, KUCL have to regulate the breach of law.

목차

I. 서론
 II. 부정경쟁행위에 대한 규제 방식의 비교
  1. 민법상 불법행위를 통한 규제 방식
  2. 특별법상 일반조항을 통한 규제방식
  3. 특별법상 한정적인 행위유형을 통한 규제방식
  4. 검토
 III. 실질적인 부정경쟁행위로서 우버(UBER) 서비스
  1. 우버(UBER) 사건의 개요
  2. 우버 서비스에 대한 대응 현황
  3. 우버 서비스 규제에 대한 우리나라 부정경쟁방지법의 한계
  4. 검토
 IV. 우리나라에 도입이 필요한 부정경쟁행위 유형
  1. 공공의 이익을 보호하기 위한 부정경쟁행위
  2. 공공의 이익을 침해하는 법규위반을 통한 부정경쟁행위
 V. 결론
 참고문헌
 

저자정보

  • 박윤석 Pak, Yun-Seok. 고려대학교 법학연구원 ICR센터 연구교수, 법학박사.

참고문헌

자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

    함께 이용한 논문

      ※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

      • 8,700원

      0개의 논문이 장바구니에 담겼습니다.