纵向价格垄断行为的法律适用

发布时间：2018-07-09 22:06

本文选题：反垄断法 + 纵向价格垄断　；参考：《山东大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：竞争是市场活力的来源,是保证市场经济良性发展的前提条件。然而现行市场中存在大量限制排除竞争的行为,其中纵向价格垄断被广泛运用且隐蔽性极强。由于纵向垄断的经济效果具有双面性,各国对其本质及其危害性认识上有多方面考虑。不同的学派经济理论认识也不一致,这些都影响着不同国家对经济政策、竞争政策的制定以及立法原则的选择。日前国家发改委对茅台和五粮液“限价令”的重罚和上海法院对“强生纵向限价案”的审判更是引来理论界广泛的讨论。国外对纵向价格垄断主要分为三种态度：一是美国、韩国,适用“合理原则”,运用经济效率标准作出是否违法的判定。二是欧盟及成员国,采取“原则禁止+豁免”原则。三是日本、澳大利亚等国,适用“本身违法”原则。我国《反垄断法》对纵向价格垄断协议的规定,与欧盟较为接近,核心包括“原则禁止”和“例外豁免”两个方面,但在法律实务方面,近2年我国也逐步引入了合理分析机制。本文认为：对纵向价格垄断行为,以上3种原则各有利弊,不宜生硬套用“合理分析原则”,而是应依据我国国情,对合理原则进行改良,以“强生案”的二审判决为先导,采用宽严相济的“简明合理原则”,同时辅助建构以市场结构为主的分析模式。本论文从以下四个方面展开论述：第一部分,对纵向价格垄断行为的基本问题进行探讨,分别叙述了纵向价格垄断行为的含义、特征、分类,最后对纵向价格垄断行为的经济效应进行了分析。第二部分,总结了国外对纵向价格垄断行为的规制经验,该部分对美国、欧盟、日本的规制原则进行了剖析,对本身违法原则、合理原则、原则禁止+例外豁免原则进行了比较,总结了可供我国借鉴的经验。第三部分,首先提出我国立法的原则,然后通过分析“白酒案”和“强生案”,总结我国司法和行政对纵向价格垄断行为规制所适用的原则,提出本人的观点。第四部分,就目前我国在纵向价格垄断适用原则上存在的问题提出了建议。肯定了司法机关适用“简明合理原则”符合中国国情,并从立法技术、具体标准、豁免条件和执法实践等方面提出了具体规制建议。
[Abstract]:Competition is the source of market vitality and the precondition to ensure the benign development of market economy. However, there are a lot of behaviors to restrict and exclude competition in the current market, in which vertical price monopoly is widely used and hidden. As the economic effect of vertical monopoly is dual, many countries consider its essence and harmfulness. Different schools of economics have different understanding of economic theories, which influence the choice of economic policy, competition policy and legislative principle. The severe penalty imposed by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) on Mao Tai and Wuliangye's "Price limit order" and the trial of "Johnson Longitudinal Price limit case" by the Shanghai Court have attracted extensive discussion in the theoretical circle. The foreign countries mainly divide into three kinds of attitude to vertical price monopoly: first, the United States, South Korea, apply "reasonable principle", use the economic efficiency standard to make the judgment whether illegal or not. Second, the EU and its member states adopt the principle of prohibition of exemption. Third, Japan, Australia and other countries, apply the principle of "violation of the law itself." The provisions of China's Anti-monopoly Law on vertical price monopoly agreements are close to those of the European Union, the core of which is "prohibition of principle" and "exemption from exceptions", but in legal practice. In the past two years, China has also gradually introduced a reasonable analysis mechanism. This paper holds that the above three principles have their own advantages and disadvantages for the vertical price monopoly, so it is not appropriate to apply the "reasonable analysis principle" rigidly, but to improve the reasonable principle according to the national conditions of our country, with the second instance judgment of "Johnson case" as the forerunner. It adopts the principle of simplicity and reasonableness of combining leniency and severity, and at the same time helps to construct an analytical model based on market structure. This paper discusses from the following four aspects: the first part discusses the basic problems of vertical price monopoly behavior, respectively narrates the meaning, characteristics, classification of vertical price monopoly behavior. Finally, the economic effect of vertical price monopoly is analyzed. The second part summarizes the foreign regulatory experience of vertical price monopoly behavior, this part of the United States, the European Union, Japan's regulatory principles are analyzed, to their own illegal principles, reasonable principles, This paper compares the principle of prohibition of exemption from exceptions and summarizes the experience that can be used for reference by our country. The third part first puts forward the principle of legislation in our country, then through the analysis of "Liquor case" and "Johnson case", summarizes the principles applicable to the regulation of vertical price monopoly behavior in our country's judicature and administration, and puts forward my views. In the fourth part, some suggestions are put forward on the application principle of vertical price monopoly in our country. This paper affirms that the application of the principle of "conciseness and reasonableness" by the judicial organs is in line with the national conditions of China, and puts forward some specific regulations from the aspects of legislative technology, specific standards, exemption conditions and law enforcement practice.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.294

【参考文献】