独禁法上の損害賠償請求訴訟における損害額認定制度の活用 : 日本と韓国の比較を中心にして独禁法上の損害賠償請求訴訟における損害額認定制度の活用 : 日本と韓国の比較を中心にしてAA1161370X Applying the Determination of Amount of Damage Rule to Antitrust Law-Related Cases : A Comparison of Japan and Korea
As a method of correcting the market disturbed by companies violating the Antitrust Law, a damage suit by the victim has attracted a lot of attention recently. The Antitrust Law of Japan and Korea in Article 25 (Japan) and Article 56 (Korea) respectively provide the right to claim compensation for damages, and, as for the contents, the victim can demand compensation for damages easily. Therefore, it was expected that many damage suits related to these provisions would be filed. However, against expectations, no such suits have been raised. What is the reason for this ? While we can make many an assumption, I suggest that the most important reason is that it is too difficult for a plaintiff to prove the damage (establishing the existence of damage and the amount of damage) . The damage caused by violating the Antitrust Law is not easy to prove because it is greatly influenced by the economic or market system. This is the reason that the Japanese Code of Civil Procedure and Korean Antitrust Law provide the Determination of Amount of Damage Rule in Article 248 (Japan) and Article 57 (Korea) , respectively. The purpose of these provisions is to reduce the burden of proof. After this rule was introduced in both countries, it is very interesting how many cases related to the Antitrust Law were solved by this rule. Therefore, this article reviews the recent situation of the two countries related to this problem.