우리 나라의 독점규제법과 사적 집행의 발전

A private enforcement of antitrust law is to recover antitrust damages for the injured private parties, in contrast with the public enforcement by administrative agencies. In case of damage claims based on the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (MRFTA), significant provisions were modified in favor of plaintiff by 2004 amendment, except treble damages and the class action which are not legislated yet. We see damages claims caused by cartel are increasing in court's dockets recently, however, difficulties in proving and determining precise amount of damages remain obstacles. Calculating damages can be carried out by economists in the form of economic analysis but it must be interpreted under the legal framework. We expect judges' active role in this area. In case of injunctive relief by which a private person is entitled to file a suit to seek prohibition of practices violating antitrust law, it has not been introduced in MRFTA. However, it is necessary for the effective and efficient private enforcement. The subject, scope and requisite of injunctive relief should be discussed in detail. Even though there may be some tension between administrative agencies and courts, the vitalization of private enforcement can stimulate public enforcement. Both public and private enforcements can collaborate deterrence of the antitrust violation and enhance the overall strength of antitrust enforcement.