노동조합에 대한 경쟁법의 적용 가부 및 적용 범위

Since a judgment was rendered by the Supreme Court of Korea in relation to the case involving a home-school teacher through Supreme Court Decision 2014Du12598 decided June 15, 2018, it became clear that the scope of workers under the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act was wider than that of employees under the Labor Standards Act, raising the question of whether competition laws could be applied to labor unions, the members of which are workers who can be considered workers under the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, not employees under the Labor Standards Act. This paper examines the cases in Korea dealing with the above issue, what views Korean theories take, and how they approach the problem in the United States, Europe, and Japan, and then reviews what reasonable conclusions are in the interpretation of Korea’s current laws for each issue and presents a reasonable solution to the case in practice. The conclusion of this paper is summarized as follows. 1. As employees under the Labor Standards Act are not business operators under the competition law, the competition law cannot be applied by considering a labor union composed of employees under the Labor Standards Act as a business organization. 2. A special type of worker may be a business operator under the competition law and a labor union with special types of workers as members may be a business organization under the competition law. Comprehensively considering that the three labor rights stipulated in Article 33 of the Constitution can be directly applied to legal relations between individuals, and the language and text and intent of Article 116 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, the competition law cannot be applied to actions that the above labor union has committed within the scope guaranteed by the three labor rights in accordance with the Constitution and the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act. Exceptionally, the competition law may be applied when the above labor union violates the competition law beyond the scope guaranteed by the three labor rights under the Constitution and the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act. If the act is performed within the scope of the three labor rights but violates the labor law in detail, the competition law should not be applied, and the labor law shall solve the problem itself. 3. Recently, the Fair Trade Commission and the prosecution seem to be applying the competition law excessively to labor unions with special types of workers as members, which is not only contrary to the purpose or intent of the Constitution or the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act but also against Article 116 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. The Fair Trade Commission and the prosecution are requested to refrain.