• Survey Research
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.57-79
• /
• 2010

This study evaluated the policy performance of i) Public Notice of Critical Information, ii) Substantiation of Facts in Labeling and Advertising, iii) Temporary Injunctions, and iv) Advertisement Correcting Misrepresented Facts, which were main policies belonged to Fair Labeling and Advertising Act(hereinafter referred to as "FLA Act"). The data was collected by visiting 76 persons personally, who were consumer policy and law experts, labeling and advertising staffs of corporations, and persons in charge of policies including public officials dealing with consumer policies at Korea Fair Trade Commission, while using a structured questionnaire at the same time. The survey was performed to examine the general policy performance and evaluation the results of FLA Act by evaluation methods. The results of the analysis are comprehensively summarized as follows. There were differences in the ranking of policies evaluated by labeling and advertising staffs of corporations and persons in charge of policies according to evaluation methods, and, in Simple Evaluation, higher scores were gained compared to Weighted Evaluation which reflected weighted values or Fuzzy Evaluation. The result shows that evaluation results can vary in policy performance evaluation according to evaluation methods.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.270-276
• /
• 2017

Previous studies of the effects of comparative advertising did not consider that comparative advertising should satisfy its legal conditions otherwise it would be unfairly comparative advertising. In this context, this study reviewed the current legal definition of 'unfairly comparative advertising' to clarify it by the definition of unfairly comparative advertising of the Guideline of Judgement of Comparative Labeling or Advertising based on the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising. In addition, this study confirmed that comparative advertising was banned by the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, which was the previous act on unfair labeling or advertising, and identified differences between the two Acts in regulating unfairly comparative advertising. This study analyzed 354 adjudication cases of unfairly comparative advertising based on the regulation of Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. As a result, the definitions of the two Acts of unfairly comparative advertising were found to correspond to each other. These results suggest empirically that comparative advertising was not banned legally in the past and the definition and judgement standards of unfairly comparative advertising have not been changed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.165-181
• /
• 2014

Advertisements and labels provided by businesses are highly likely to contain false or exaggerated content because of the business's purposes. In these cases, it is difficult to deliver proper information to consumers, and regulation is necessary to some extent. In particular, information delivery is more important in the health medical and biotechnology areas than any other because of their specialized characteristics. The Fair Labeling and Advertising Act regulates ordinary content for labels and advertisements, while individual laws stipulate regulations for false or exaggerated advertisements and labels. Criminal law might apply in fraud cases depending on their characteristics. Therefore, consistency is needed among criminal fraud laws and regulations, the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising, and legal punishment. However, a review of all these laws found that there is no such consistency. Accordingly, this paper asserts the need for improvement in this area.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.180-185
• /
• 2018

The literature of unfair labeling and advertising(ULA) was reviewed, along with the requirement for establishing an obligation to compensate for damage(OCD) by it based on the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising(FLAA). ULA covers cases of possible deception or misleading consumers and thereby undermining fair trade order, or making other business entities do so. FLAA regulates OCD by ULA, but the Civil Act should also be considered for its effective results since the Act regards ULA as unlawful and duty bound to make compensation for damages arising therein. In this context, the study analyzed qualitatively 17 supreme court precedents related to OCD by ULA among a total of 119 by advertising to find the characteristics of the judgemental principles. It is found that most principles came from FLAA and the Act focusing on the meaning of false or exaggerated advertising, which is one of the following five ULA types according to its standards of judgment: its requirement for fraudulent acts, the meaning of damage by it, the perspective of calculation of damages, the requirement of OCD, and the characteristics of claim for damages. A more effective policy is suggested based on FLAA and related research should be continually carried on.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.16 no.8
• /
• pp.157-164
• /
• 2011

As a computer technology is combined with communication technology, information and communication technology developed rapidly. As a result, The number of internet users increased quickly. Ability of human in using information was epoch-making, and it was increased through the Internet on behalf of an information-oriented society. As an Internet user hereby spreads explosively, legislations were established and revised to protect Internet users and consumers however, it is certain that the damages of Internet users are still increasing day by day. The purpose of this paper is to protect internet users and to reform the system. Also each portal site should provide fair information, and be responsible for conclusion of a contract. After they subdivide into personal service style, and analyze every situation and problems, they should improve problems.