公平交易法對獨占事業濫用市場地位行為之規範─以掠奪性訂價為例

Regulation on Monopoly Abuse under the Fair Trade Law─The Example of Predatory Pricing

系所名稱：法律研究所 學位別：碩士 畢業學年：95年 指導教授：王志誠 本文為一結合經濟學與法律學兩大領域之論文。全文探討之主題依序為「特定市場之界定」、「獨占事業與獨占類型」、「獨占事業掠奪性訂價行為之測定與規範」與「獨占事業因實施掠奪性訂價行為而違反公平法第十條規定時之民事、行政與刑事責任」等面向。於「特定市場之界定」部分，首先針對經濟學理論之市場結構進行介紹，其中將說明市場占有率之計算公式與市場集中度之計算指標，並就各種市場結構之特質予以敘述。之後，則以公平法相關規範對於特定市場之界定與公平會實務運作之結果與結論加以探究。於「獨占事業」部分，將就公平法於九十一年增訂第五條之一後所造成之條文前後不連貫且語意不清之情形加以說明，並嘗試提出建議修正條文；另則針對公平會於九十五年十一月二日第七八二次委員會議對【Yahoo！奇摩拍賣網站賣家收取交易手續費案】作成不處分之理由提出評析與質疑，同時建請公平會針對以「假設性獨占者檢測」方式認定獨占事業之部分訂定處理原則；此外，亦將介紹美國休曼法第二條所明文之獨占類型─實施獨占、意圖獨占與結合或共謀獨占，以及經由聯邦法院百餘年來所發展之關鍵法律概念與構成要件，而後並將我國法與美國法之規範進行異同之比較與整理。於「獨占事業掠奪性訂價行為之測定與規範」部分，將針對美國經濟學界所提出之二種影響美國聯邦司法實務於判斷事業訂價行為是否具掠奪性時最鉅之測定方式，亦即「Areeda-Turner測定法」與「補償測定法」進行說明。之後則就獨占事業之掠奪性訂價行為於我國公平會訂定之相關規範說明與決議中所提出之判斷與測定方式加以說明，並將其與美國聯邦司法實務採行之見解相互比較；此外，亦將說明我國規範獨占事業實施掠奪性訂價行為之公平法第十條第一款之「不公平之方法」與「直接或間接阻礙」加以闡述，並嘗試就「不公平之方法」擬定明確之判斷依據。於獨占事業因實施掠奪性訂價行為而違反公平法第十條規定時之「民事責任」部分，將分別針對公平法第三十條之「權益侵害之除去與防止請求權」、第三十一條之「侵害權益之損害賠償責任」進行說明，並於第四項與第五項就第三十二條所規定之「請求懲罰性賠償金」與「專依該項利益計算損害額」之要件加以闡述；於「行政責任」之部分，則以公平法第四十一條為說明中心，並就行政罰法於九十五年二月五日正式施行後，對同為行政法規一環之公平法於適用時將〈所〉產生之影響加以說明；於「刑事責任」之部分，則以公平法第三十五條第一項及第三十八條等與獨占規範相關之部分為重心，進而介紹「先行政後司法」與「兩罰制」之概念，並針對公平法第三十八條及第四十一條與行政罰法第二十六條適用時之競合問題作一探討。以藉此說明獨占事業實施掠奪性訂價行為時所需負擔之法律責任。

This paper focuses on the research for relevant market, definition of monopoly, monopolist, and legal liability for predatory pricing under the fair trade law or antitrust law. This paper is divided into the following six charters:The first Charter remarks the motives and methods of this paper, and also reviews some academic studies of the similar topic.In Charter Two, this paper remarks the market structure in economics and the relevant market in antitrust law. The former includes perfect competition market, monopolistic competition market, oligopoly market and monopoly market. The later includes product market and geographic market.In Charter Three, this paper introduces the definition of monopolist under the Fair Trade Law in Taiwan, and analyzes section two of the Sherman Act of the United States. In this part, I discuss the model of legislation and criticise Article 5-1 of Fair Trade Law in Taiwan, and provides a draft of amendment about it. In addition, I explore the concept of monopolization, attempted monopolization and combinations or conspiracies to monopolize under the Sherman Act.In Charter Four, this paper offers comments on predatory pricing. Firstly, this paper makes focus on the Areeda-Turner Test and Recoupment Test. Secondly, this paper discusses on the decisions of United States Federal Courts about predatory pricing. Finally, this paper tries to review the guidelines which were enacted by the Fair Trade Commission of Taiwan. In Charter Five, this paper addresses the civil liability, executive liability and criminal penalty for predatory pricing under the Fair Trade Law in Taiwan.In the final Charter, this paper makes brief conclusions and suggestions.