|
In National Agricultural Cooperative Federation (NACF) v. Korean Fair Trade Commission (2009 decision), the Supreme Court opined that NACF¡¯s exclusive purchase rights of chemical fertilizers (CFs) from all manufacturers amount to undue exclusive dealing that restrain opportunities for competitors under Article 3-2(V) of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act. However, it should be noted that NACF, who represents large numbers of farmers in Korea, neither decreased the supply of CFs nor increased sale price to farmers. Indeed, there are abundant evidences that show the purpose of the exclusive right to purchase in question was to lower the selling price to farmers. This case raises a hard question that even competitive exclusive transactions can be a violation of the MRFTA if all competitors are excluded from the market.
|