행정조사제도의 실무적 절차와 쟁점 - 일본의 독점금지법상 조사절차를 중심으로 -

The purpose of this study is to compare the administrative investigation system introduced by the revision of the Industrial Technology Protection Act. The Industrial Technology Protection Act requires the investigation of the actual conditions of Article 17 and the reporting of industrial technology violations in Article 15. However, Japan does not have individual laws such as Korea's Basic Law on Administrative Investigation. Japan's administrative investigations are conducted under individual laws. With regard to the investigation of the Industrial Technology Protection Act, this study seeks to study the administrative investigation system under the Japanese Antitrust Act. In order to ensure the appropriateness of the administrative investigation procedures, the Japan Fair Trade Commission (“JFTC”) provides standard steps and key points for the administrative investigation procedures based on the past practices into account. The guidelines specify what public officials should comply with when conducting an administrative investigation into cases that violate antitrust laws. Guidelines are issued to enhance the transparency of administrative investigation procedures and to help smooth implementation of administrative investigations. The JFTC’s investigation procedures for alleged antitrust cases are classified into two categories : administrative investigation procedures and compulsory investigation procedures. The administrative investigation procedures is a procedures taken to investigate alleged antitrust cases potentially subject to administrative measure such as a cease and desist order, etc. and compulsory investigation procedures is a procedures taken to investigate alleged antitrust cases potentially subject to prosecution seeking criminal punishment. Of the above two procedures, the Guidelines are designed to cover the JFTC’s administrative investigation procedures. If it is suspected that an act violating the Antimonopoly Act(the Act on Prohibition on Private Monopolization and Maintenance of Fair Trade) is committed, the JFTC is authorized to investigate companies, etc., involved in an alleged violation and, in its administrative investigation procedures, take measures such as on-site inspection, order to submit documents, retention, order to appear and to be interrogated, order to report, based on the JFTC’s authority with indirect enforcement which indirectly guarantee performance of investigation by punishment, while ensuring appropriateness of the procedures in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations in order to clarify whether the Antimonopoly Act is violated or not and to issue an order to take necessary measures to eliminate violations. In this paper, the administrative investigation procedures of the JFTC are studied. In this paper, specifically, the following points have been reviewed : the Guidelines of legal grounds, Explanation at the time of commencing On-site Inspection, Submission and retention of materials, Perusal and copy of submitted materials, Presence of an attorney during On-site Inspection, Procedures for interviews, Points to note in an interview, Length of interview and break times, Procedures for preparing records and affixing signatures and seals, Procedures for an order to report. For this examination, I would like to get a hint at the implementation of the administrative investigation into the Industrial Technology Research Act.