法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 競爭法寬恕政策實施成效之比較研究-美國、德國、韓國經驗對我國之啟示(A Comparison of the Effectiveness and Efficacy of the Leniency Programme: What can Taiwan Learn from the Success Stories of the USA, Germany and South Korea?)
編著譯者: 石世豪
出版日期: 2018.04
刊登出處: 台灣/公平交易季刊第 26 卷 第 2 期 /115-144 頁
頁  數: 24 點閱次數: 468
下載點數: 96 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 石世豪
關 鍵 詞: 聯合行為合意寬恕政策誘因趨同發展配套
中文摘要: 公平法於 2011 年修正時,仿照美國等先例導入「寬恕政策」;該法於 2015 年修正,又引進韓國「公平交易法」率先實施的「檢舉獎金」制度。前者在國際間逐漸發展為各國競爭法制「趨同演進」的重要環節,後者也不乏其他國家陸續跟進採用。由於我國導入上述兩套執法工具,分別已滿 6 年及 2 年,適用案例各為 3 件、2 件,其續效在國際比較上並不亮眼,本文於是比較美國、德國、韓國與我國「寬恕政策」架構及內涵,先從形式面上對照彼此「大同小異」情形。有鑑於上述兩套執法工具係根據誘因機制設計,本文於是進一步藉由「賽局理論」框架,檢視事業及其員工「窩裡反」及「檢舉」所面對的利害情境,再參酌跨科際整合的批判性實證分析觀點,點襯出制裁與調查、損害賠償及證據法則相關法制配套,雖然處於「幕後」卻不可忽視的關鍵性影響。
英文關鍵詞: CartelConspiracyLeniency ProgrammeIncentiveConvergenceCoordination
英文摘要: Taiwan has incorporated a leniency programme in its anti-cartel enforcement for more than 6 years. A monetary reward system following the example of South Korea was also introduced more than 2 years ago. Although the legislature has attached a lot of value to the leniency programme and reward system, their applications are still rather modest. This article summarizes a comparative study with the same title that was sponsored by the Fair Trade Commission of Taiwan which concluded that - despite the convergence of the leniency programme among peer competition authorities - supporting institutions such as the (penal and/or administrative) punishment regime, the investigative capacity of the authority as well as the compensation law (which stipulates the way in which private enforcement functions) play critical roles in the effectiveness and efficacy of the leniency programme.
目  次: 一、前言
二、囚犯賽局:一個理論,成套誘因
(一)禁止聯合,轉為暗默
(二)減免處罰,誘窩裡反
(三)趨利避害,下有對策
(四)搭配獎金,賞重則勇
三、功能趨同:回應挑戰,國際合作
(一)美國創始,刑事配套
(二)各國跟進,工具相仿
(三)法制有別,異質嵌合
(四)跨國合作,同儕協力
四、成敗利鈍:工具務實,成效紛歧
(一)借鏡試行,磨合精進
(二)作用複雜,過度化約
(三)配套機制,日趨精緻
五、代結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
返回功能列