• Journal of Distribution Research
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.37-63
• /
• 2012

In franchise business, exclusive sales territory (sometimes EST in table) protection is a very important issue from an economic, social and political point of view. It affects the growth and survival of both franchisor and franchisee and often raises issues of social and political conflicts. When franchisee is not familiar with related laws and regulations, franchisor has high chance to utilize it. Exclusive sales territory protection by the manufacturer and distributors (wholesalers or retailers) means sales area restriction by which only certain distributors have right to sell products or services. The distributor, who has been granted exclusive sales territories, can protect its own territory, whereas he may be prohibited from entering in other regions. Even though exclusive sales territory is a quite critical problem in franchise business, there is not much rigorous research about the reason, results, evaluation, and future direction based on empirical data. This paper tries to address this problem not only from logical and nomological validity, but from empirical validation. While we purse an empirical analysis, we take into account the difficulties of real data collection and statistical analysis techniques. We use a set of disclosure document data collected by Korea Fair Trade Commission, instead of conventional survey method which is usually criticized for its measurement error. Existing theories about exclusive sales territory can be summarized into two groups as shown in the table below. The first one is about the effectiveness of exclusive sales territory from both franchisor and franchisee point of view. In fact, output of exclusive sales territory can be positive for franchisors but negative for franchisees. Also, it can be positive in terms of sales but negative in terms of profit. Therefore, variables and viewpoints should be set properly. The other one is about the motive or reason why exclusive sales territory is protected. The reasons can be classified into four groups - industry characteristics, franchise systems characteristics, capability to maintain exclusive sales territory, and strategic decision. Within four groups of reasons, there are more specific variables and theories as below. Based on these theories, we develop nine hypotheses which are briefly shown in the last table below with the results. In order to validate the hypothesis, data is collected from government (FTC) homepage which is open source. The sample consists of 1,896 franchisors and it contains about three year operation data, from 2006 to 2008. Within the samples, 627 have exclusive sales territory protection policy and the one with exclusive sales territory policy is not evenly distributed over 19 representative industries. Additional data are also collected from another government agency homepage, like Statistics Korea. Also, we combine data from various secondary sources to create meaningful variables as shown in the table below. All variables are dichotomized by mean or median split if they are not inherently dichotomized by its definition, since each hypothesis is composed by multiple variables and there is no solid statistical technique to incorporate all these conditions to test the hypotheses. This paper uses a simple chi-square test because hypotheses and theories are built upon quite specific conditions such as industry type, economic condition, company history and various strategic purposes. It is almost impossible to find all those samples to satisfy them and it can't be manipulated in experimental settings. However, more advanced statistical techniques are very good on clean data without exogenous variables, but not good with real complex data. The chi-square test is applied in a way that samples are grouped into four with two criteria, whether they use exclusive sales territory protection or not, and whether they satisfy conditions of each hypothesis. So the proportion of sample franchisors which satisfy conditions and protect exclusive sales territory, does significantly exceed the proportion of samples that satisfy condition and do not protect. In fact, chi-square test is equivalent with the Poisson regression which allows more flexible application. As results, only three hypotheses are accepted. When attitude toward the risk is high so loyalty fee is determined according to sales performance, EST protection makes poor results as expected. And when franchisor protects EST in order to recruit franchisee easily, EST protection makes better results. Also, when EST protection is to improve the efficiency of franchise system as a whole, it shows better performances. High efficiency is achieved as EST prohibits the free riding of franchisee who exploits other's marketing efforts, and it encourages proper investments and distributes franchisee into multiple regions evenly. Other hypotheses are not supported in the results of significance testing. Exclusive sales territory should be protected from proper motives and administered for mutual benefits. Legal restrictions driven by the government agency like FTC could be misused and cause mis-understandings. So there need more careful monitoring on real practices and more rigorous studies by both academicians and practitioners.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.299-346
• /
• 2016

There were also various decisions made in medical area in 2015. In the case that an inmate in a sanatorium was injured due to the reason which can be attributable to the sanatorium and the social welfare foundation that operates the sanatorium request treatment of the patient, the court set the standard of fixation of a party in medical contract. In the case that the family of the patient who was declared brain dead required withdrawal of meaningless life sustaining treatment but the hospital rejected and continued the treatment, the court made a decision regarding chargeable fee for such treatment. When it comes to the eye brightening operation which received measure of suspension from the Ministry of Health and Welfare for the first time in February, 2011, because of uncertainty of its safety, the court did not accept the illegality of such operation itself, however, ordered compensation of the whole damage based on the violation of liability for explanation, which is the omission of explanation about the fact that the cost-effectiveness is not sure as it is still in clinical test stage. There were numerous cases that courts actively acknowledged malpractices; in the cases of paresis syndrome after back surgery, quite a few malpractices during the surgery were acknowledged by the court and in the case of nosocomial infection, hospital's negligence to cause such nosocomial infection was acknowledged by the court. There was a decision which acknowledged malpractice by distinguishing the duty of installation of emergency equipment according to the Emergency Medical Service Act and duty of emergency measure in emergency situations, and a decision which acknowledged negligence of a hospital if the hospital did not take appropriate measures, although it was a very rare disease. In connection with the scope of compensation for damage, there were decisions which comply with substantive truth such as; a court applied different labor ability loss rate as the labor ability loss rate decreased after result of reappraisal of physical ability in appeal compared to the one in the first trial, and a court acknowledged lower labor ability loss rate than the result of appraisal of physical ability considering the condition of a patient, etc. In the event of any damage caused by malpractice, in regard to whether there is a limitation on liability in fee charge after such medical malpractice, the court rejected the hospital's claim for setoff saying that if the hospital only continued treatments to cure the patient or prevent aggravation of disease, the hospital cannot charge Medical bills to the patient. In regard to the provision of the Medical Law that prohibit medical advertisement which was not reviewed preliminarily and punish the violation of such, a decision of unconstitutionality was made as it is a precensorship by an administrative agency as the deliberative bodies such as Korean Medical Association, etc. cannot be denied to be considered as administrative bodies. When it comes to the issue whether PRP treatment, which is commonly performed clinically, should be considered as legally determined uninsured treatment, the court made it clear that legally determined uninsured treatment should not be decided by theoretical possibility or actual implementation but should be acknowledged its medical safety and effectiveness and included in medical care or legally determined uninsured treatment. Moreover, court acknowledged the illegality of investigation method or process in the administrative litigation regarding evaluation of suitability of sanatorium, however, denied the compensation liability or restitution of unjust enrichment of the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service and the National Health Insurance Corporation as the evaluation agents did not cause such violation intentionally or negligently. We hope there will be more decisions which are closer to substantive truth through clear legal principles in respect of variously arisen issues in the future.

• (The) Research of the performance art and culture
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.5-38
• /
• 2020

The current state of performance halls in South Korea is closely related to the performance art and culture of the nation as the culture of putting on and enjoying a performance is deeply rooted in public culture and arts halls representing each area at the local government level. Today, public culture and arts halls have multiple management purposes, and the subjects of their management are in the public domain including the central and local governments or investment and donation foundations in overwhelming cases. Public culture and arts halls thus have close correlations with the institutional aspect of cultural policies as the objects of culture and art policies at the central and local government level. The full-blown era of public culture and arts halls opened up in the 1980s~1990s, during which multi-purpose performance halls of a similar structure became universal around the nation. Public culture and arts halls of the uniform shape were distributed around the nation with no premise of genre characteristics or local environments for arts, and this was attributed to the cultural policies of the military regime. The Park Chung-hee regime proclaimed Yusin that was beyond the Constitution and enacted the Culture and Arts Promotion Act(September, 1972), which was the first culture and arts act in the nation. Based on the act, a five-year plan for the promotion of culture and arts(1973) was made and led to the construction of cultural facilities. "Public culture and arts" halls or "culture" halls were built to serve multiple purposes around the nation because the Culture and Arts Promotion Act, which is called the starting point of the nation's legal system for culture and arts, defined "culture and arts" as "matters regarding literature, art, music, entertainment, and publications." The definition became a ground for the current "multi-purpose" concept. The organization of Ministry of Culture and Public Information set up a culture and administration system to state its supervision of "culture and arts" and distinguish popular culture from the promotion of arts. During the period, former President Park exhibited his perception of "culture=arts=culture and arts" in his speeches. Arts belonged to the category of culture, but it was considered as "culture and arts." There was no department devoted to arts policies when the act was enacted with a broad scope of culture accepted. This ambiguity worked as a mechanism to mobilize arts in ideological utilizations as a policy. Against this backdrop, the Sejong Center for the Performing Arts, a multi-purpose performance hall, was established in 1978 based on the Culture and Arts Promotion Act under the supervision of Ministry of Culture and Public Information. There were, however, conflicts of value over the issue of accepting the popular music among the "culture and arts = multiple purposes" of the system, "culture ≠ arts" of the cultural organization that pushed forward its establishment, and "culture and arts = arts" perceived by the powerful class. The new military regime seized power after Coup d'état of December 12, 1979 and failed at its culture policy of bringing the resistance force within the system. It tried to differentiate itself from the Park regime by converting the perception into "expansion of opportunities for the people to enjoy culture" to gain people's supports both from the side of resistance and that of support. For the Chun Doo-hwan regime, differentiating itself from the previous regime was to secure legitimacy. Expansion of opportunities to enjoy culture was pushed forward at the level of national distribution. This approach thus failed to settle down as a long-term policy of arts development, and the military regime tried to secure its legitimacy through the symbolism of hardware. During the period, the institutional ground for public culture and arts halls was based on the definition of "culture and arts" in the Culture and Arts Promotion Act enacted under the Yusin system of the Park regime. The "multi-purpose" concept, which was the management goal of public performance halls, was born based on this. In this context of the times, proscenium performance halls of a similar structure and public culture and arts halls with a similar management goal were established around the nation, leading to today's performance art and culture in the nation.