Should Intent Be a Separate Element of an Abuse of Market Dominance?

This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle

Hyungbae Kim, Jan 27, 2008

In the history of Korean competition law enforcement, the decision of the Korean Supreme Court in the refusal to deal case, POSCO, is a milestone in market dominance abuse cases (a concept similar to monopolization under U.S. antitrust law). On November 22, 2007, the Supreme Court held that evidence of specific intent, or purpose, and anticompetitive effects must be proven for there to be a violation of