• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.128
• /
• pp.107-119
• /
• 2006

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.163
• /
• pp.62-71
• /
• 2012

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.157
• /
• pp.64-77
• /
• 2011

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.117
• /
• pp.29-51
• /
• 2005

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.162
• /
• pp.126-137
• /
• 2012

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.49-54
• /
• 1998

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.175-209
• /
• 2019

The bundled discounting which the dominant undertakings engage in is problematic in terms of competition restraint. Bundled discounts generally benefit not only buyers but also sellers. Specifically, bundled discounts usually costs a firm less to sell multiple products. In addition, Bundled discounts always provide some immediate consumer benefit in the form of lower prices. Therefore, competition authorities and courts should not be too quick to condemn bundled discounts and apply the neutral and objective standard in bundled discounting cases. Cascade Health v. Peacehealth decision starts ruling from this prerequisite. This decision pointed out that the dominant undertaking can exclude rivals through bundled discounting without pricing its products below its cost when rivals do not sell as great a number of product lines. So bundled discounting may have the anticompetitive impact by excluding less diversified but more efficient producers. This decision did not adopt Lepage case's standard which does not require the court to consider whether the competitor was at least as efficient of a producer as the bundled discounter. Instead of that, based on cost based approach, this decision said that the exclusionary element can not be satisfied unless the discounts result in prices that are below an appropriate measures of the defendant's costs. By adopting a discount attribution standard, this decision said that the full amount of the discounts should be allocated to the competitive products. As the seller can easily ascertain its own prices and costs of production and calculate whether its discounting practices exclude competitors, not the competitor's costs but the dominant undertaking's costs should be considered in applying discount attribution standard. This case deals with bundled discounting practice of multiple healthcare services by the dominant undertaking in healthcare market. Under the Korean healthcare system and public health insurance system, the price competition primarily exists in non-medical care benefits because public healthcare insurance in Korea is in combination with the compulsory medical care institution system. The cases that Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Law deals with, such as cartel and the abuse of monopoly power, also mainly exist in non-medical care benefits. The dominant undertaking's exclusionary bundled discounting in Korean healthcare markets may be practiced in the contracts between the dominant undertaking and private insurance companies with regards to non-medical care benefits.

• 월간 기계설비
• /
• s.59
• /
• pp.30-33
• /
• 1995

조달청은 지난 5월 23일 조달행정쇄신방안을 마련, 현행 가격위주 낙찰제도를 품질확보를 위한 계약제도로 개선한다는 방침 아래 2단계 경쟁입찰제, 경쟁적 협상계약 제도를 도입하는 등 다양한 조달 방식을 마련, 재정경제원 등 관계부처와 협의를 통해 예정가격 작성준칙 등 관계규정을 개정해 올해안에 시행하기로 했다.

• Digital Contents
• /
• no.6 s.97
• /
• pp.36-37
• /
• 2001

최근 삼성경제연구소의 한 보고서에 의하면 단기적으로 정보통신 분야의 수요부진을 타계하기 위해 업체들은 경쟁적으로 가격인하 전략을 추구할 가능성이 있다고 전망하고 있다. 특히 소비자를 대상으로 하는 제품을 중심으로 가격인하 경쟁이 본격적으로 나타날 것으로 보이는데 PC와 휴대폰 등이 1차적인 대상이 될 수 있다. 정보부문에서 업체들은 냉각된 PC시장에서 점유율 확대를 위해 '저가격 고급화'라는 전략을 구사할 것이다.

• 월간 기계설비
• /
• s.57
• /
• pp.30-38
• /
• 1995

감사원은 부실시공방지를 위해 건설제도 전반을 일대 혁신하는 총54개 사항의 건설제도 개선 방안을 최종 확정하고 재정경제원과 건설교통부등 관계부처에 통보했다. 앞으로 예정가격이 일정규모 이상인 낙찰자 선정방법이 가격경쟁에서 기술경쟁방식으로 개선되고, 공동도급으로 발주되는 공사의 입찰참가자격이 제한군 입찰대상업자만 입찰할 수 있도록 바뀐다. 또 감사원은 입찰 보증제도에서 일괄입찰보증하는 경우 매 공사별 입찰보증금 납부를 면제하도록 하고, 각종 보증 수수료를 건설업자의 성실도에 따라 차등 징수하도록 했다.