• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.627-670
• /
• 2009

This study analyzed Korean Fair Trade Commission's judgemental cases of cartels in telecommunications and media industry and presented the following results. First, cartels were formed frequently in multi-channel broadcasting industry, telecommunications industry, movie industry, and newspaper industry. In addition, price-fixing were observed in almost all subfield of telecommunications and media industry. Second, administrative guidance facilitated more opportunities for collusion in the telecommunications industry than in the media industry. Third, the telecommunications and media industry, similar to overall domestic industries, had a high proportion of hard-core cartels. Fourth, the depth of judgemental case in evaluating agreements among competitors was generally low, even though detail evaluations were found in the cases of large fines. Fifth, the overall level of sanctions was relatively low.

• Journal of Korea Entertainment Industry Association
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.153-170
• /
• 2021

This study was attempted to derive strategic implications for activating professional sports by conducting in-depth interviews with professional sports officials such as players, teams, federations, agencies, etc., by searching for factors that cause match fixing and deriving preventive strategies based on them. Eight people with more than 3 years of experience working in professional sports were selected using the snowball sampling technique. Data were collected and analyzed by applying a semi-structured in-depth interview method for them. As a result of the analysis, five core categories (the learning effect from the cartel for entering university, the culture learned in a camp training, the manifestation of the latent learning effect, the negative effect of the human network, the personal disposition) were derived as factors causing match-fixing. As for the strategy to prevent match fixing, first, improving the college entrance examination system oriented on individual capability, second, improving the education system for student athlete, third, establishing a prevention system, fourth, continuing education, fifth, and activating the agent system as the core categories. Implications for the derived research results and future research directions were discussed.

• Journal of Korea Entertainment Industry Association
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.101-110
• /
• 2019

Filmic spaces are not only a core expressive factors that can embody both internal and external meanings of films, but also play an important role for initiating dramatic context in terms of narratives. They establish visible environment in which provocative incidents occur and characters' behaviors are induced, include characters' psychology or emotional meanings of narratives and provoke tensions through symbolic meanings and the implicit function of surface background. This paper, therefore, analyzes the film, , by focusing on the dramatic function of narrative space. This film provides insights and thoughts through deep philosophical reflection, by escaping from the convention of such a genre, through deep philosophical reflection, by escaping from the convention of such a genre, though it belongs seemingly to the crime thriller genre using Mexico's drug cartel as it main material. In the film, narrative spaces are responsible for emotions invoking dramatic tensions beyond provocative incidents and the elaborately planned and controlled mise-en-scene absorbed audiences' attention by organizing ultimate suspense. In conclusion, flow and dramatic lingering imagery of this film might be achieved by power of scenes rather than plot factors. This study thus explained the correlation between narrative spaces and dramatic immersion, by analyzing spaces appearing in and visualized construction. It is hoped that this will further extends the pattern of researches on dramatic immersion, which have been primarily focused on plots and characters.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.175-209
• /
• 2019

The bundled discounting which the dominant undertakings engage in is problematic in terms of competition restraint. Bundled discounts generally benefit not only buyers but also sellers. Specifically, bundled discounts usually costs a firm less to sell multiple products. In addition, Bundled discounts always provide some immediate consumer benefit in the form of lower prices. Therefore, competition authorities and courts should not be too quick to condemn bundled discounts and apply the neutral and objective standard in bundled discounting cases. Cascade Health v. Peacehealth decision starts ruling from this prerequisite. This decision pointed out that the dominant undertaking can exclude rivals through bundled discounting without pricing its products below its cost when rivals do not sell as great a number of product lines. So bundled discounting may have the anticompetitive impact by excluding less diversified but more efficient producers. This decision did not adopt Lepage case's standard which does not require the court to consider whether the competitor was at least as efficient of a producer as the bundled discounter. Instead of that, based on cost based approach, this decision said that the exclusionary element can not be satisfied unless the discounts result in prices that are below an appropriate measures of the defendant's costs. By adopting a discount attribution standard, this decision said that the full amount of the discounts should be allocated to the competitive products. As the seller can easily ascertain its own prices and costs of production and calculate whether its discounting practices exclude competitors, not the competitor's costs but the dominant undertaking's costs should be considered in applying discount attribution standard. This case deals with bundled discounting practice of multiple healthcare services by the dominant undertaking in healthcare market. Under the Korean healthcare system and public health insurance system, the price competition primarily exists in non-medical care benefits because public healthcare insurance in Korea is in combination with the compulsory medical care institution system. The cases that Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Law deals with, such as cartel and the abuse of monopoly power, also mainly exist in non-medical care benefits. The dominant undertaking's exclusionary bundled discounting in Korean healthcare markets may be practiced in the contracts between the dominant undertaking and private insurance companies with regards to non-medical care benefits.