‘Grab-Uber’ 사건을 통해 본 아세안의 기업결합 신고제도와 ‘인수’의 개념

Only four countries in Southeast Asian countries reviewed the Grab-Uber case. Grab and Uber were ride-hailing service platform operators in eight Southeast Asian countries, and Uber withdrew its platform business and Grab acquired the Uber’s business assets. The competition authority of Singapore took corrective actions and imposed fines and the competition authority of Philippine approved consent order. However, Indonesian and Vietnamese commission determined the transaction was purely an asset acquisition without any transfer of control from Uber to Grab. But Uber left the platform business in southeast Asia and Grab absorbed most of Uber’s business. In those countries, acquisition only means that transfer of control from acquired undertakings to acquiring undertaking by taking over assets. Therefore, Indonesia and Vietnam should revise the law and decree to broaden the concept of acquisition. The Vietnam competition law since 2018 has four Mergers & Acquisitions notification standards and includes domestic turnover standards. Korean competition law should delete the notification standards of assets and change the notification standards of worldwide turnover to domestic turnover.