사법적 관점에서 본 공정거래법 ― 시장지배적지위 남용행위를 중심으로 ―

This article examines how to understand the substantive provisions of Korean competition law and how to establish criteria for those interpretation and assessment with a focuss on abuse of market-dominant position. The discussion here starts with a understanding that a legal relationship with which competition law works basically premises a legal relationship between private persons and competition law has developed by establishing substantive requirements to be applied to private law relationships based on the objectives extending from the perspective of co-ordination of interests to that of trade and market order. This understanding leads to the affirmative valuation for the role of judges as experts in enforcing private laws and producing case laws in the competition law field to the effect of revitalizing discussions on competition law from a private law perspective. Following this, this article makes clear that the Supreme Court of Korea in Posco judgment describes the value of the primary purpose of competition law representing “protection of competition” in relation to the principle of freedom of contract as correcting its flaws and restoring its original function. Such recognition seems to have affected the way in which the Supreme Court assessed the illegality of conduct in the specific case. Furthermore, the requirements establishing abuse of market-dominant position are analyzed element by element by categorizing as violator, conduct and illegality in terms of substantive law analysis in this article. Abuse of market-dominant position as a representative violation type regulated for the improvement of trade activities in the market should be worth attention as it shows the characteristics of competition law more than any other violations having relevance to the private law as well though. As such, a discreet, normative approach is required to harmonize and balance between considerations both from private law and competition law aimed at conflicting values. In this regard, so-called “form-based approach” is arguably still valid for the interpretative method of the Korean competition law if taking so-called “effect-based approach” as an complementary, analytic tool from the aspect of the market performance.