공정경쟁과 불공정경쟁의 경계 - 불공정경쟁법의 철학적 규범적 토대에 관한 연구 - = A Demarcation of Fair Competition and Unfair Competition: A Study on the Philosophical and Normative Foundation of the Law of Unfair Competition

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this article, I discussed the legal foundation of the law of unfair competition. The Economic Liberalism the ideology that the commercial trade encourages the fair competition, and it brings the economic prosperity and social wellbeing. The unfair competition harms the social wellbeing. I reviews the four theoies of the demark between fair competition and unfair competition. The first is the Lockean Labor Value Theory; the second is Personality Theory which is based on the the personality theory of Hegel and the personality theory of Kolher who develops his own theory based on Hegel’s theory; the third is the Economic Incentive Theory that the traditional common law develops; the last is the justification base on Morality on which the French unfair competition roots. The Lockean Labor Value Theory provides the strong justification of protection from unfair competition. It argues that, based on the natural law theory, the fruit of human labor should be protected from unfair competition such as invasion. The unfair competition of palming off protecting goodwill from invasion and the unfair competition of misappropriation are justified to protect under the Lockean Labor Value Theory. The personality theories of Hegel and Kokher provide the justification to the direct misleading of product source as unfair competition. The incentive theory argues without the protection from free riding the social resources are less productive and resulted in deficiency of social wellbeing in final. The last theory, the justification based on commercial morality and good faith. This theory is very flexible to the changes of business environment. However, it does not provide a certainty to the traders on the market. The various perspectives on the demark between fair competition and unfair competition means to be the more necessity of prohibiting unfair competition conducts. The proposed types of the unfair competition prevention act of Korea has not be understood on one philosophical normative foundation but plural bases of the foundation as mentioned in this article.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 논문에서는 불공정경쟁법의 법이념적 기초에 관하여 살펴보았다. 자유주의 경제하에서 상업적 거래는 공정경쟁을 조장함으로서경제적 발전과 사회적 이익을 가져온다는 이념을 가지고 있다. 불공정경쟁은 이러한 사회적 이익을 해하는 행위로 인정된다. 불공정경쟁과 공정경쟁을 나누는 기준에 관하여 역사적으로 확립된 네 가지원칙에 대하여 검토해보았다. 그 원칙은 i) 로크의 노동가치이론, ii) 헤겔과 헤겔의 이론에 근거한 쾰러의 개인주의적 권리론, iii) 전통적인 영미법상의 장려설 그리고 iv) 특히 프랑스가 의존했던 도덕적 정의론이다. 네가지 원칙은 독립적인 것이 아니라 상호보완적이다. 로크의 노동가치론은 가장 강한 정당성을 부여하는 것으로서 자연법에근거하여 인간의 노동이 가져온 가치있는 결과를 무단침입 등 불공정경쟁행위로부터 보호해야 한다는 이론이다. 로크적 이론에 기초하는 것은 goodwill형성에 근거하는 사칭모용행위나 부정취득 법리 등이 이를 근거로 한다. 개인주의적 권리론은 직접사칭에 대하여 정당성을 부여한다. 장려설은 실용주의적 입장에서 불공정경쟁행위로 금지하지 않으면 투자의 유인이 감소하게 되어 궁극적으로 사회적 효용이 감소한다고 한다. 마지막으로 도덕적 정의는 신의성실의 원칙, 공정한 행위 등 추상적 기준을 제시하는 것으로서 불공정경쟁행위에대하여 탄력적인 대응을 할 수 있지만 행위준칙으로서는 구체성이떨어진다. 프랑스 불공정경쟁법은 전통적으로 도덕적 정의에 기반하였다. 불공정경쟁행위를 판단하는 기준이 다양하다는 것은 그만큼불공정행위를 금지해야할 필요성이 많다는 것을 의미한다. 우리 부정경쟁방지법상의 부정경쟁행위의 유형은 하나의 철학적 규범적 근거에 의한 것이 아니라 본 논문에서 언급한 다양한 근거를 바탕으로이해하여야 한다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 송영식, "지적소유권법 하" 육법사 2008

2 최정열, "부정경쟁방지법" 진원사 2015

3 황의창, "부정경쟁방지 및 영업비밀보호법" 세창출판사 2009

4 Locke, "Two Treatise of Government" Cambridge University Press 1988

5 A. Samuel Oddi, "Trips--Natural Rights and a Polite form of Economic Imperialism" 29 : 415-, 1996

6 d’Euge`ne Pouillet, "Traité des marques de fabrique et de la concurrence déloyale" 1912

7 Tim W. Dornis, "Trademark and Unfair Competition Conflicts:Historical-Comparative, Doctrinal, and Economic Perspectives" Cambridge University Press 2017

8 Landes, "Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective" 30 : 265-, 1987

9 Carleton A. Shafer, "The Value of the Trade-Mark and Trade Name to the Modern Business Corporation in the Merchandising of Its Manufactured Product to the General Public" 14 : 209-, 1931

10 Justin Hughes, "The Philosophy of Intellectual Property" 77 : 287-, 1988

11 Giorgio Resta, "The New Frontiers of Personality Rights and the Problem of Commodification" 26 : 33-, 2011

12 Eugen Ulmer, "The Law of Unfair Competition and the Common Market" 53 : 625-, 1963

13 Harrig D. Nims, "The Law of Unfair Competition and Trade-Marks"

14 Bernard Schwartz, "The Law Book Exchange" 181-, 1998

15 Walter J. Derenberg, "The Influence of the French Code Civil on the Modern Law of Unfair Competition" 4 : 1-, 1955

16 Grafton Dulany Cushing, "On certain Cases Analoguous to Trade-Marks" 4 : 321-, 1890

17 J. F. Iselin, "New German Law of Unfair Competition" 13 : 156-, 1897

18 MCCARTHY, "McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition" Clark Boardman Callaghan 1995

19 Rudolf Callmann, "He Who Reaps Where He Has Not Sown: Unjust Enrichment in the Law of Unfair Competition" 55 : 595-, 1942

20 John E. Hale, "Good Will as Property" 10 : 62-, 1925

21 Carla Hesse, "Enlightenment Epistemology and the Laws of Authorship in Revolutionary France, 1777-1793" 30 : 109-, 1990

22 Overton H Taylor, "Economics and the Idea of Jus Naturale" 44 : 205-, 1930

23 Robert H. Nelson, "Economics As Religion-From Samuelson to Chicago and Beyond" The Pennsylvania State University Press 268-269, 2001

24 R. George Wright, "Dreams and Formulas: The Roles of Particularism and Principlism in the Law" 37 : 195-, 2008

25 Carl Gareis, "Das juristische Wesen der Autorrechte, sowie des Firmen- und Markenschutzes" 35 : 185-, 1877

26 R. Klostermann, "Das geistige Eigenthum an Schriften, Kunstwerken und Erfindungen, nach Preussischem und internationalem Rechte, vol. II" Patentgesetzgebung—Musterschutz—Waarenbezeichnungen 1869

27 R. Klostermann, "Das geistige Eigenthum an Schriften, Kunstwerken und Erfindungen, nach Preussischem und internationalem Rechte, vol. I" Allgemeiner Theil—Verlagsrecht und Nachdruck 1867

28 Josef Kohler, "Das Recht des Markenschutzes mit Berücksichtigung ausländischer Gesetzgebungen und mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die englische, anglo-amerikanische französische, beglische und italienische Jurisprudenz"

29 Ugo Mattei, "Comparative Law and Economics" University of Michigan Press 1988

30 I W. BLACKSTONE, "COMMENTARIES" Cooley ed 1899

31 Kohler, "Becht des Markenschutzes" 1884

32 Richard A. Spinello, "A Defense of Intellectual Property Rights" Edward Elgar Pub 2009