경쟁법 사건에서의 전문가 증인의 역할과 한계- IT 산업의 특성과 이에 대한 사법적 고려

AS the number of cases where the rule of reason is to be applied increased, the role of expert witness will be expanded. Because Microsoft case was occurred in EU, US and Korea in a series of timeline, it's very good case to compare the approaches among those countries to understand the differences with regard to the expert witness related area. Whereas US court applied the rule of reason instead of per se illegal, the traditional approach to the illegal tying case, EU Court First Instance applied somewhat similar to the per se illegal not in the face but in the whole context. This difference made the role of expert witness restricted than that of US. However, Microsoft case is to be interpreted as an turning point in applying 'objective justification' which is understood which will be more broadly applied. This will make the role of expert witness expanded in the future. Daubert doctrine and Kumho case which was developed in US court shows some implications to our cases in applying expert witness to the antitrust case. Thus far law & economics has contributed a lot to the antitrust cases as useful tools in analysing the cases, but it evidently has its limits. Our further study on this issue has to be made in the consideration of the estimated importance and frequency of the expert witness in the antitrust case.