Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study of the Effects and Regulations of Comparative Advertising: Focusing on the Definition and Application of Unfairly Comparative Advertising

비교 광고의 효과와 규제에 대한 연구: '부당한 비교'의 정의와 적용을 중심으로

  • Cho, Jae-Yung (Department of Advertising and PR, Chungwoon University)
  • 조재영 (청운대학교 광고홍보학과)
  • Received : 2016.11.23
  • Accepted : 2017.03.10
  • Published : 2017.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Previous studies of the effects of comparative advertising did not consider that comparative advertising should satisfy its legal conditions otherwise it would be unfairly comparative advertising. In this context, this study reviewed the current legal definition of 'unfairly comparative advertising' to clarify it by the definition of unfairly comparative advertising of the Guideline of Judgement of Comparative Labeling or Advertising based on the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising. In addition, this study confirmed that comparative advertising was banned by the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, which was the previous act on unfair labeling or advertising, and identified differences between the two Acts in regulating unfairly comparative advertising. This study analyzed 354 adjudication cases of unfairly comparative advertising based on the regulation of Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. As a result, the definitions of the two Acts of unfairly comparative advertising were found to correspond to each other. These results suggest empirically that comparative advertising was not banned legally in the past and the definition and judgement standards of unfairly comparative advertising have not been changed.

본 연구에서는 '비교 광고'가 성립되기 위해서는 법률적 차원의 조건을 충족시켜야 하며 그렇지 않을 경우에는 '부당한 비교 광고'가 될 수 있음에도 불구하고 이에 대해 고려하지 않은 기존의 비교 광고의 효과 연구들에 대해 문제점을 제시하였다. 이러한 맥락에서 본 연구는 '부당하게 비교하는 광고'에 대한 현행 규제 법률인 '표시 광고의 공정화에 관한 법률'에 근거한 '비교 표시 광고에 관한 심사 지침' 중 '부당하게 비교하는 표시 광고'의 규정 내용을 검토하여 그 법률적 정의를 분명히 하였다. 그리고 '부당하게 비교하는 광고'에 대한 과거의 규제 법률인 '독점규제 및 공정거래에 관한 법률'에서는 비교 광고를 금지하였었다는 주장의 사실 여부를 확인하고 또한 현행 및 과거의 규정 간에는 어떠한 차이가 있는지를 알아보기 위해 과거의 규제 법률이 적용된 심결 사례 354건을 질적으로 내용 분석하였다. 그 결과, 부당하게 비교하는 표시 광고에 대한 과거 및 현재의 두 법률상의 판단 기준은 동일한 것으로 나타났다. 결론적으로, 본 연구는 국내에서의 비교 광고 금지 여부에 대한 논쟁에 대해 비교 광고는 과거의 법률에서도 금지된 적이 없었으며 또한 과거 및 현행 법률상의 비교 광고의 의미와 부당한 비교 광고의 판단 기준에는 변화가 없었다는 사실을 실증적으로 밝혔다는 점에서 의의를 지닌다.

Keywords

References

  1. C. S. Kim, H. S. Lee, "A Study on the Effects of Comparative Advertising : Focusing on the Effects of Advertising Endorser and Competitive Brand Interference", The Korean Journal of Advertising, 23(3), pp. 7-32, 2012.
  2. H. J. Bang, P. S. Park, "The Effect of Comparative Advertising by Message Sidedness", Advertising Research, 87, pp. 133-158, 2010.
  3. H. S. Kee, S. Y. Lee, "The Effect of Comparative Advertising According to their Comparative Intensity, Copy Claim Variation and Product Involvement", The Korean Journal of Advertising, 12(3), pp. 53-80, 2001.
  4. M. W. Yu, P. S. Park, "The Effect of Comparative Advertising by Product Involvement and Endorser", Advertising Research, 104, pp. 5-47, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16914/ar.2015.104.5
  5. K. Uhm, "The Commercial Speech as a Freedom of Expression and a Right to Know of the Consumers: The Regulatory Changes and Case Analysis of Advertising and Comparative Advertising", Journal of Media Law, Ethics and Policy Research, 6(2), pp. 319-354, 2007.
  6. J. Y. Cho, "A Study on the Unfairness of the Comparative Labelling and Advertising Activities in the Judicial Precedents", Korean Journal of Communication & Information 39, pp. 428-472, 2007.
  7. S. Y. Park, Y. S. Jeong, M. S. Song. A Study on Comparative Advertising and Competition Policy. Korean Consumer Agency. pp. 9-112, 2009.
  8. S. Yook, "Comparative Advertising, Competition and Trademark", Chonbuk Law Review 47, pp. 577-605, 2016.
  9. J. H. Kim, "Legal Aspects of Comparative Advertisement as a Competition Accelerator - Focusing on the U.S. and EU Legislation and Court Cases", DONG-A LAW REVIEW, 51, pp. 395-440, 2011.
  10. Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising. National Law Information Center. Available From: http://www.law.go.kr.
  11. Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. National Law Information Center. Available From: http://www.law.go.kr.
  12. R. D. Wilson, "An Empirical Evaluation of Comparative Advertising Messages: Subjects' Responses on Perceptual Dimensions, Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1), 53-57, 1976.
  13. S. Goodwin, M. Etgar, "An Experimental Investigation of Comparative Advertising: Impact of Message Appeal, Information Load, and Utility of Product Class. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(2), 187-202, 1980. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150929
  14. Aaker, D., & Myer, J. G. Advertising Management. Prentice-Hall International Series In Management, 1987.
  15. H. H. Friedman, L. Friedman, "Endorser Effectiveness by Product Type", Journal of Advertising Research, 19(5), 63-71, 1979.
  16. C. S. Kim, H. S. Lee, "A Study on the Effects of Comparative Advertising : Focusing on the Effects of Advertising Endorser and Competitive Brand Interference", The Korean Journal of Advertising, 23(3), pp. 7-32, 2012.
  17. R. E. Petty, J. T. Cacioppo, R. Goldman, "Personal Involvement as a Determinant of Argument-based Persuasion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.847
  18. R. E. Petty, J. T. Cacioppo, D. Schumann, "Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1086/208954
  19. Y. H. Kim, S. E. Lee, J. H. Kim, "The Effect of Comparative Advertising by Message Sidedness and Comparison Type: Moderating Role of Need-for-Cognition and Product Type, The Korean Journal of Advertising and Public Relations 17(1), pp. 235-272, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16914/kjapr.2015.17.1.5.235
  20. J. S. Kwak, "Attraction Effect in Comparative Advertising on the Evaluation of Brand and Purchase Intention", Korean Marketing Review 20(2), pp. 1-20, 2005.
  21. S. Y. Park, Y. S. Jeong, M. S. Song. A Study on Comparative Advertising and Competition Policy. Korean Consumer Agency. pp. 9-112, 2009.
  22. K. Uhm, "The Commercial Speech as a Freedom of Expression and a Right to Know of the Consumers: The Regulatory Changes and Case Analysis of Advertising and Comparative Advertising", Journal of Media Law, Ethics and Policy Research, 6(2), pp. 319-354, 2007.
  23. Korea Fair Trade Commission. Available From: http://ftc.go.kr.
  24. Korea Fair Trade Commission. 9705Ki-heowk0777 (Decision 97-170) 1997.11.27. Available From: http://ftc.go.kr.
  25. Korea Fair Trade Commission. 9710Kwang-sa1375 (Decision 97-170) 1997.12.31. Available From: http://ftc.go.kr.