| As worldly economy was developed continuously and market size was expanded, so after 10th century, M&A wave, conspicuous increase in takeovers and amalgamation among businesses, appeared 6 times. In the 5th wave (1993-2000), super large amalgamation appeared frequently, according to global growth strategy, centering on developed countries, and international M&A also began to increase in a great scale from 1988. Recently, in the 6th wave, the objects of global business trust changed into new markets having high effectiveness from developed countries, and international M&A also increases continuously again. In the worldly wave, China-Korea amalgamation is also under development, and amalgamation markets in China were formed regularly, beginning from 2003. Korea, after 1997 IMF financial crisis, went through amalgamation markets regularly and changed systems continuously till now.Amalgamation is one of the important phenomena in the modern economic living. As a property trade form of businesses on their rights of property, amalgamation is an effective expansion means of businesses to change into financial management from property management, and it shows a competition law of jungle in the market economy. Amalgamation expands latent ingredients promptly with knives of the both sides and enhances competitiveness in markets. On the other hand, amalgamation enhances actual ability of businesses and removes potential competitors, too. The concentration of markets increases constantly, has a possibility of monopoly, and erases effective competition. So, amalgamation is an issue on which respective countries have concernments in laws and restriction policies.Many countries which developed in many aspects prepared for the systems of laws and policies of the core of the Antimonopoly Law for business combination to block restricting the development of free competitive manufacturing. As the forms of laws, there are market structures (protection of market competition order, restriction of monopoly, restriction of competition, and ban of Amalgamation) and transactions (ban of unfair transaction). The system of restricting business combination is an important content which forms the Antimonopoly Law.The Antimonopoly Law of China which appeared to restrict economic capability of businesses forming in the course of economic development and to maintain friendly effective competitiveness in market economy began to be enforced from June 1,2006 after the 19th conference of the 10th Standing Committee of the National People's Congress passed it on June 30,2007. The law went through a lot of discussions in the courses from the progress to the establishment, and it was established as a main law through 13 years since the plan of Standing Committee of the National People's Congress began. Korea established the Antimonopoly Law in 1981. The law realizes the regulation of restriction on amalgamation. As globalization of economic tendency is active and China-Korea market economic system is prepared for sufficiently, this thesis intends to found a amalgamation system realistically on the comparison of related contents of Korea-Korea amalgamation system, on the basis of detailed studies on China-Korea amalgamation system.But, the differences in economic circumstances and non-economic circumstances that respective countries encounter couldn't but have an influence on establishing the Antitrust Law. National size, economic development stage, and geographic, economic situation have to be clearly considered on to compare laws of China and Korea. So, they can be simply referred to for comparison of the two countries' laws, but can not be applied as they are, to solve a problem with economic situations and policies considered on.China and Korea have cultural tradition, historic development, and development history similar each other, because they are in the south east together, and so legal systems of the two countries are. The two countries have continental legal systems, especially East Asian legal systems. The economic legal system of Korea is composed of two theme divisions, Fair Trade Act and Consumer Protection Act, and aims at establishing economic system to protect freedom and fair. Economic Law of Korea takes the legal style of German, but recently it is influenced by American law under gradual development. Economic Law of Korea has abundant theories and experiences. The two countries have different economic legal systems and institutional contents respectively, but they have similar social problems to solve, legal theory bases, and main institutions. Korea went through the change into market-leaded development models from government-leaded development models. In addition Korea went through a transition period, from restriction, monopoly, and concentration to effective competition and free market economy. So, Korea have to refer to economic legal theories, institutions and practical experiences of China in many aspects.On the other hand, the two countries already have a trade relationship, as a companion, due to historic, cultural, and geographic intimation and economic mutual subsidiarity since diplomatic relation in 1992. As trade and investment of the two countries increase, so business amalgamation of the two countries increases continuously. In this background, it has valuable necessity and actual meaning to comparatively study legal institutions of business amalgamation of the two countries.As economy becomes global and market economy systems of the two countries are improved, this thesis studies two countries' systems of business amalgamation in detail, and on the basis of the study, finds a way to fix and improve the system. A lot of cases of amalgamation are announced and studied from the Department of Commerce of China and Fair Trade Commission of Korea. The two countries' organizations related to Antimonopoly Law have to grasp antimonopoly inspection and look into understanding and operation of the systems concretely, especially theoretically.This author thinks that it is necessary to look into the accordance of the concept of amalgamation with the markets for amalgamation in order to judge if a company amalgamation takes a permission, according to Antimonopoly Law. At the next stage, it has to be judged, through an inspection, if the amalgamation has a dominant relationship or restrict competitiveness. At the same time, for the purpose of making the judgement easier, managers have to report to antimonopoly organizations of the Department of Commerce on the basis of the regulation of Art.21, Antimonopoly Law of China, when managers are concentrated. On the basis of Art.12, Antimonopoly Law of Korea, the companies or persons of the companies related with the structure more than a certain structure must report transference of stocks, additional position holding of official board positions, transference of business rights, amalgamation, and creation of a company to Fair Trade Commission. It is very important to study what is the difference in two countries' legal regulations, what is the difference in restriction of amalgamation between two countries in studying the judgement systems of the two countries of the report of two countries' amalgamation.When comparing two countries' laws, this thesis doesn't follow the laws of the past, but consider on the policies related to two countries' economic situations. This thesis intends to discuss on law establishment, having relation each other, on the comprise with amalgamation announcement, to study Antimonopoly law in combination deeply, and to be helpful in amalgamation system at suitable concrete economic development stages.The creations are as followings.First, on the view of thesis structure, for the purpose of traditional comparisons this thesis discuss on related relationship between China and Korea at the last chapter and develop law establishment theories at every sections and chapters to compare with bases and practices.Second, this thesis studies performs a channel study on the cases of the two countries' antimonopoly organization appearances. In addition this thesis will suggest to combine law establishments and practical experiences of the two countries each other as well as other countries to consider on appraisal systems, plea rules, and judgement systems.This main thesis contents are the analyses as followings.Chapter 1 is a rough description on the studies on the definition and conception of amalgamation, restriction objects of amalgamation restriction, types of amalgamation, background and tendency of two countries' amalgamation systems, and basic theories of amalgamation.Chapter2 is a study on report of amalgamation and is progressed on the emphasis of two countries' report systems of amalgamation. The study is on the theory related to general businesses' amalgamation reports, standards and contents of Korean businesses' amalgamation reports, other countries' standards and contents, standards and contents of Chinese businesses' amalgamation reports, and comparison of Chinese and Korean businesses' amalgamation report systems Chapter3 is a study on judgement system of business amalgamation, and on the emphasis of the two countries' judgement systems of amalgamation, this thesis describes roughly the judgement system of amalgamation and studies Korean businesses'amalgamation judgement models, Chinese businesses'amalgamation judgement models, and Chinese and Korean businesses' amalgamation judgement system of amalgamation.Chapter4, by studying typical cases of two countries' forbidden amalgamation, comparatively appraises Korean case of Samik Musical Instrument Co. Ltd and Youngchang Musical Instrument. Co. Ltd, Chinese case of business amalgamation in Coca Cola and Huiyuan Co. Ltd, and typical forbidden cases of two countries' amalgamation.Chapter5, by studying typical cases of collection treatments of two countries' amalgamation and exceptional acceptance of Korean amalgamation, studies mostly the cases of typical cases of collection treatments. First, Korean case of business amalgamation between The Hite and Jinro, between SK Telecom and Sinasegi Communication, Chinese case of business amalgamation between Inbevn and Anheuser, two countries' typical case of collection treatment for amalgamation. In addition, this thesis looks into Korean typical case of exceptional acceptance of amalgamation.Chapter6 is a comparative study on the subject of two countries' amalgamation restriction and studies Korean subject of amalgamation restriction, Chinese subject of amalgamation restriction, and in the end, two countries subjects of amalgamation restriction.Chapter7 is a conclusion. in the aspect of two countries' amalgamation. The chapter appraises two countries, reflecting each other and studies comparatively appraise of Korean amalgamation system, appraise of Chinese amalgamation system, instruction from the two countries' amalgamation system, and the cases related to two countries' amalgamation.
|
PDF Full Text Request