• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.113
• /
• pp.15-31
• /
• 2005

최근 미국의 법원은 담합을 입증하려는 시도를 주로 경제적 증거에 입각하여 분석하는 추세를 보여 왔다. 하지만 담합의 존재를 입증하는데 있어서 경제분석의 역할에도 많은 이견이 날카롭게 표출되었다. 담합의 존재에 관한 경제적 증거를 분석하는 데에 있어 유일한 합리적 근거는 최신과점이론(Modern oligopoly theory)이다. 그런데 증인으로 나선 많은 경제학자들과 법원이 최신과점이론에 자신들의 분석을 뚜렷이 기초하지 않았기 때문에, 판례법의 현 상태가 불만족스럽다고 주장하는 것이 본 논문의 핵심적 내용이다. 셔먼법 제1조는 ''계약, 결합, 공모(contract, combination, or conspiracy)에 의해 초래되는 거래(즉 경쟁)의 불합리한 제한을 규제''하는데, 이러한 계약 결합, 공모의''용어들은 합의라는 하나의 개념으로 통합하여 이해''할 수 있다. 제 1조는 다수의 당사자가 ''단일한 목적, 공통된 의도와 의견의 일치, 혹은 의사의 합치(Meeting of minds)'', 즉 ''공통된 계획에 대한 의식적 참가(consious commitment to a common scheme)''를 합의한 모든 협약을 규제한다. 셔먼법 제 1조 위반을 입증하기 위해서는 일치된 행동이 합의 하에서 일어났음을 입증해야 한다. 미국 법원은 합의를 추론할 수 있는 증거력 있는 정황증거(admissible circumstantial evidence)의 원칙을 확립하였다. 독점가격에 가까운 수준의 과점가격 설정은 ''조정되었다(coordinated)''라고 칭해지는데, 이는 ''구두 합의''와 ''암묵적 합의''의 두 가지 형태로 나뉜다. 한편, 일회게임 과점 모형과 반복게임 모형은 과점이론의 핵심을 이룬다. 과점에 대한 Chamberlin의 견해는 본래 게임과 Stigler의 모형은 그와 같은 생각의 오류를 가르쳤다. 그러나 판례법은, Petroleum products antitrust litigation사건과 reserve supply사건에서 볼 수 있듯이 종종 그러한 교훈을 망각했다. 최신과정이론과 판례를 종합해 보면, 합의의 존재에 관해 경제학자가 이끌어내는 추론과 법원이 이끌어내는 추론을 포괄하는 다음의 네 가지 일반적 원칙이 도출된다. 1. 합의가 추론되기 위해서는 상호의존성을 넘는 무언가가 먼저 제시되어야 한다. 2. 합의의 존재는 일회게임 과점 모형에서의 비협조적 내쉬균형과 일치하는 행동으로부터는 추론될 수 없다. 3. 합의의 존재는, 비록 무한반복 과점게임에서의 비협조적 내쉬균형(혹은 Chamberlin-Fellner식의 과점)과 일치하더라도, 일회게임 과점 모형에서의 비협조적 내쉬균형과 일치하지 않는 행동으로부터 추론될 수 있다. 4. 증거는 구두합의의 존재를 뒷받침해야만 한다. 이러한 원칙에서 얻을 수 있는 가장 중요한 교훈은, 합의가 존재하지 않을 경우 과점상황으로부터는 독점가격이 예상될 수 없다는 사실을 법원이 인식하는 것만으로도 합의의 추론에서 범하기 쉬운 가장 큰 오류를 회피할 수 있다는 것이다.

• Journal of agricultural medicine and community health
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.179-194
• /
• 1991

Despite its universal coverage of health insurance, the rural health insurance program(RHIP) stands at the crossroads in Korea. The RHIP has weaknesses in stability of financing, problems of inequities in the provision of health services and has suffered from high cost of running the program. The author has analyzed these problems from the perspective of health insurance policy and presented several options for improvement. First of all, this study urged the importance of a firm Governmental commitment of RHIP with the 50% subsidization of contributions as the Government had promised, instead of the current 40%. This can be justified from the 20% subsidization by the Government for the contributions of private school teachers and their dependents, who belong to richer segments of the population. Second, various cost containment measures ought to be sought curbing the rising demand for medical through strengthening health education and increasing individual responsibility, and tightening the claim review process. Third, this study requires the Government to run a demonstration project on the introduction of case payment system for primary health care. Fourth introducing an income-related cost sharing scheme is another possibility. Reforming the cost sharing formula for large medical expenditures is recommendable for a beginning. This measure can take the form of tax credit for medical expenditures of the poor. Fifth, the degree of financial adjustment among health insurance plans should be levelled up for enhancing stability of RHIP and social solidarity. Sixth, health policy should be redirected toward development of rural health resources and higher priority should be put on relieving difficulties in access to care. Seventh. the insurance plan owned-hospital needs to be developed or provision of health services in the medically underserved areas, and the need of such facilities is particularly acute for geriatric care, rehabilitation and renal dialysis, etc. Eighth, more generous insurance benefits are required of the elderly who are suffering the most : elimination of the maximum 180 days of benefit period and provision of glasses and artificial dentures, etc. Ninth. the economies of scale principle is working for the operating expenses of regional self-employed insurance plan. Thus, measures should be instituted to pursue an optimum size of health insurance plans. Lastly, excessive dependence on exclusion items is an evil so that some radical remedies are urgently required to cut them.

• Environmental and Resource Economics Review
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.493-518
• /
• 2005

It has been taken for 10 years since Climate Change Convention could it be made. And Kyoto Protocol will come into force as an international law as from 16. Feb 2005. As based on it, Annex I countries will implement their mitigation projects on GHG reductions and press developing countries on GHG reduction target. Korea has not duty target on it yet. But it will be held a COP(Conference of Party) on negotiation for reduction target of second commitment period. If Korea has a real duty, Industry sector should reduce GHG emissions. Then Market mechanism will be need to introduce for this. This study started having a question "Is it possible to introduce emissions trading in Korea?". To solve the problem, this study analysed GHG emissions, marginal abatement cost, market price with 11 companies of industry (about 36% of Korea emissions). minus target is impossible to implement reduction target ver base year (2002). And emissions trading scheme also can't make the market without additional policy and measures. This study suggest that it is need to import credits and give a subsidy of government to encourage it. The imported credit can reduce the demand curve within the marginal abatement cost curves. But the effectiveness of credit is not the same as continually growth. As a result, Allowing 40% credit into emissions trading market is the best to reduce costs. However, a subsidy is the little bit difference. A subsidy make marginal abatement cost curves down for itself. Giving 30% for subsidy, it is the best. Considering both of importing credits and subsidy, it is the best effects in the reducing cost for company. especially 30% is the best effects respectively. This Study show that government wants to consider designing emissions trading, encourage participants competitiveness, and encourage the early action, government has to allow credit trading and give a subsidy to participants.