CAJ | 학술논문

我国《合同法》及其司法解释中规定的垄断行为与《反垄断法》中规定的垄断行为的关系是一个值得思考的问题。由于前者并不要求当事人具有市场支配地位,因此其与后者中的滥用市场支配地位行为有很大不同。技术合同中的垄断行为多数应该归入纵向垄断协议,少数可以归属于横向垄断协议,若当事人居于市场支配地位,则其还有可能归于滥用市场支配地位行为。有必要使《合同法》中的垄断与《反垄断法》中的垄断接轨,因此应尽快制定知识产权反垄断法规或指南。
아국《합동법》급기사법해석중규정적롱단행위여《반롱단법》중규정적롱단행위적관계시일개치득사고적문제。유우전자병불요구당사인구유시장지배지위,인차기여후자중적람용시장지배지위행위유흔대불동。기술합동중적롱단행위다수응해귀입종향롱단협의,소수가이귀속우횡향롱단협의,약당사인거우시장지배지위,칙기환유가능귀우람용시장지배지위행위。유필요사《합동법》중적롱단여《반롱단법》중적롱단접궤,인차응진쾌제정지식산권반롱단법규혹지남。
The relationship between monopoly behavior in contract law and its judicial interpretation and monopoly behavior in anti-monopoly law of our country is worth meditative. Because the first does not require that the party has a dominant market position, so it＇s very different from the abuse of dominant market position behavior of the latter. Most of the monopoly behaviors in technology contract should be classified as vertical monopoly agreements and a few can be vested in horizontal monopoly agreements. If the party has a dominant position in the market, the behaviors may belong to abuse of dominant market position behavior. It is necessary to link up the monopoly in contract law with the monopoly in anti-monopoly law, therefore intellectual property antitrust rule or guideline should be formulated as soon as possible.