메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
윤신승 (전남대학교 법학전문대학원)
저널정보
한국경쟁법학회 경쟁법연구 경쟁법연구 제44권
발행연도
2021.9
수록면
27 - 65 (39page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Daewoo Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering Case (2013) is a case where the act of unilaterally applying the “productivity improvement rate” and calculating the number of hours lower than the actual consignment content, while Daewoo Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering Case (2019) is a case where the act of lowering the subcontract price by applying the “efficiency rate” of the revised additional work lower than the “efficiency rate’ of the main construction (the ratio of the actual input time). In addition, the Korea Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering Case (2020), Samsung Heavy Industries Case (2020), and Daewoo Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering Case (2021), which were handled by the Fair Trade Commission (“FTC”), are problematic cases in which the actual input was excessively reduced and the subcontract price was lower than the manufacturing cost. In all of the above cases, the essence of the act can be said to be the randomness, opacity, and excessive reduction of the calculation of the number of hours applied to the calculation of the actual subcontracting price. However, since the “time-value” contract itself is difficult to see as a contract that compensates for the actual working hours invested (the time required for "work completion" may vary depending on the worker's skill level), it is difficult to say that the “time-value” is illegal or unfair just because there is a gap with the actual input time of the contractor.Considering the transactional status of the principal contractor, the “time-value“ contract may be said to be a contract method with room for abuse by the principal contractor. However, in the process of applying Article 4 (2) 5 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (“Act“) to attempts by the principal contractor to lower subcontract payments using the framework of the “time-value“ contract, it is difficult to find a benchmark, which is the standard for 'low unit price'. This provision is a non-rebuttable presumption clause to facilitate proof of Article 4, Paragraph 1 of the Act, but in reality, it does not function as such. According to Daewoo Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering's ruling, even if the market price is unilaterally calculated in favor of the original operator, it must be proved that the resulting "subcontract price" is lower than "general price" in the shipbuilding industry. This difficulty seems to have led the FTC to adopt a method of comparing subcontracting payments with "manufacturing prices" in the Korea Shipbuilding &Marine Engineering Incident (2020), and it will be necessary to see if the legal grounds can be resolved. The progress of administrative litigation should be followed, but as a solution to the above problems, it may be possible to think of amending Article 4 (2) 5 (or 1) of the Act (e.g. one of the specific measures might be deleting "at a uniform rate" in Article 4 (2) 1 of the Act and amend it to be read "decide on subcontracting without justifiable reasons"). For example, under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, it is possible to consider approaching the problem of exploitation and abuse of demand-dominant enterprises, or applying sector-specific regulations based upon the point of view that the problems associated with the “time-value“ contract are sector-specific problems happening in the shipbuilding industry.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0