본문 바로가기
  • Home
Basic Search

Some Thoughts on the Reform of Regulation on the Maximum Resale Price Maintenance

  • Journal of Regulation Studies
  • 2005, 14(2), pp.163-188
  • Publisher : 한국규제학회
  • Research Area : Social Science > Public Administration

Jae Yeol Kwon 1

1숭실대학교

Candidate

ABSTRACT

Early in the United States of America, the Supreme Court ruled that the maximum resale price maintenance (“MRPM”) was per se illegal. Many academics and practitioners criticized the Court's decision., In the case of State Oil v. Khan decided in 1997, the Court abandoned the per se rule for the MRPM in consideration of the MRPM's procompetitive effect. Now, it has been widely accepted that the MRPM improves the comsumer welfare by reducing resale price. In Korea, the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (“Monopoly Regulation Act”) provides that “no enterpriser shall engage in a resale price maintenance; provided that this shall not apply to the case where there exist justifiable reasons in terms of the maximum price maintenance preventing the transactions of commodities or services in excess of specified prices.” Thus, the MRPM is automatically void except for justifiable reasons. However, taking the MRPM's procompetitive effect into consideration, this Study recommends that the MRPM be permitted in principle and treated as a kind of unfair trade under the Monopoly Regulation Act if it has an anticompetitive effect.

Statistics

  • 369 Viewed
  • 90 Downloaded

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Basic Search Advanced Search