• 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.