• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.180-185
• /
• 2018

The literature of unfair labeling and advertising(ULA) was reviewed, along with the requirement for establishing an obligation to compensate for damage(OCD) by it based on the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising(FLAA). ULA covers cases of possible deception or misleading consumers and thereby undermining fair trade order, or making other business entities do so. FLAA regulates OCD by ULA, but the Civil Act should also be considered for its effective results since the Act regards ULA as unlawful and duty bound to make compensation for damages arising therein. In this context, the study analyzed qualitatively 17 supreme court precedents related to OCD by ULA among a total of 119 by advertising to find the characteristics of the judgemental principles. It is found that most principles came from FLAA and the Act focusing on the meaning of false or exaggerated advertising, which is one of the following five ULA types according to its standards of judgment: its requirement for fraudulent acts, the meaning of damage by it, the perspective of calculation of damages, the requirement of OCD, and the characteristics of claim for damages. A more effective policy is suggested based on FLAA and related research should be continually carried on.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.270-276
• /
• 2017

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.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.16 no.8
• /
• pp.157-164
• /
• 2011

As a computer technology is combined with communication technology, information and communication technology developed rapidly. As a result, The number of internet users increased quickly. Ability of human in using information was epoch-making, and it was increased through the Internet on behalf of an information-oriented society. As an Internet user hereby spreads explosively, legislations were established and revised to protect Internet users and consumers however, it is certain that the damages of Internet users are still increasing day by day. The purpose of this paper is to protect internet users and to reform the system. Also each portal site should provide fair information, and be responsible for conclusion of a contract. After they subdivide into personal service style, and analyze every situation and problems, they should improve problems.