공정거래법상 경쟁제한성 판단기준에 관한 연구 - 소비자후생 기준과 소비자선택 기준을 중심으로 -

One of the important values pursued by modern competition law is consumer welfare, and consumer choice also affects consumer welfare. Therefore, the impact on consumer choice should also be considered in assessing anti- competitiveness. However, according to consumer welfare standards, which have dominated many competition law regimes since the late 1970s when the Chicago School took the mainstream position, the only goal of competition law is to increase consumer economic welfare, and competition restrictions should be judged based on price or output. Approaches that point out problems with consumer welfare standards and suggest new criteria for judging competition restrictions are also being presented, one of which is consumer choice standards or analysis model which emphasizes the freedom of choice of consumers or trading counterparties in competition law enforcement. In Europe, the view that consumer choice or freedom to competition is important in competition law and policy, rooted in ordoliberalism, which developed around the Freiburg School in Germany after World War II, has had a great influence on EU competition law from the beginning. This article first explains how consumer welfare standards have been established and gained mainstream status. Thereinafter it introduces the debate over consumer welfare standards based on price and efficiency, and consumer choice standards in the United States since the late 1990s, and analyses the role of consumer choice or freedom to compete in EU competition law, ordoliberalism which has heavily affected the EU competition law and the recent trends led by the modernization of EU competition law. Based on these discussions, the criteria for assessing anti-competitiveness under the Korea Monopoly Regulation Act are analyzed and implications for the interpretation and enforcement of the same Act are presented.