FTC: shock "Mobis no charge" … Review by Kim Sang-Joo

Entry 2018.11.29 16:00

The reason is that the Fair Trade Commission decided to sell the parts to the resellers, Hyundai Mobis (012330)Kim Sang-Joo, chairman of the Fair Trade Commission, criticized the mode of law enforcement, when the prosecution denied any criminal charges against executives such as corporations and alumni Presidents.

President Kim's policy is often criticized for expanding criminal prosecution in defiance of the features of the Fair Trade Act, which, unlike ordinary criminal offenses, is difficult to specify. After the inauguration of Kim Jong Il, who has focused on extending criminal sentences, the question of whether the FTC investigation becomes insufficient is raised.

In the Hyundai Mobis case, it is said that the FTC has little evidence presented to the prosecution. Prosecutors also complain that they have been accused of failing to comply with the criminal sanctions. Some point out that this happened because the FTC abused the criminal charge by entering into a political logic rather than an economic logic.

Accus criminal charges of the FTC, check 「the response to the crime can not be specified

The FTC's claims against Hyundai Mobis and its executives were the first corporate events of January 22, 2009 after President Kim Sang-Joo announced the treatment of violations of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC has accused Hyundai Mobis, former CEO, and Chung Mo (vice president of parts sales) of having acted as prosecutors in the incident management process.

At head office level, MOBIS has set a sales target of 3 to 4% over the previous year to promote sales promotion for dealers, who has already been informed of the current sales situation of the sales office through agency councils. Given that the Mobis self-audit had also highlighted the problem of refoulement, the FTC decided that it could prove its deliberate obligations, which are necessary for criminal prosecution.

However, the prosecution decided that the evidence presented by the FTC did not meet the requirement for criminal sanctions. In order to impose a sentence, it is necessary to identify the damage agent, but the prosecution explained that the victim was not specified in the complaint filed by the FTC. The FTC reported that 65 of the 445 respondents (14.6%) responded that they had purchased unsolicited parts and that they had not accepted the parts request. of Hyundai Mobis. However, it is said that the agents of the agency who were mentioned for reference during the course of the investigation annulled the statement that they would never have suffered any damages.

Hyundai Mobis has not specified sales of spare parts forcibly delivered to agents, the prosecutor said. It must be distinguished from sales due to forcibly transferred parts to the agency and sales due to normal transactions, but this is not the case. The prosecution asked the FTC to specify sales for the forced sale, but failed to provide additional data. The charge appears to have evoked Hyundai Mobis' contention that there was no mandatory deportation.

In response, the FTC official said: "Since transaction data between Hyundai Mobis headquarters and dealers is mixed between high sales and sales, it is not easy for the FTC to specify sales. based on complete transaction data. "We filed a complaint with the Crown to confirm whether a criminal sanction was possible given that the company had deliberately instructed the company to reverse the situation by imposing a decision. administrative court imposing a fine of 500 million won.

Reviews by Kim Sang-jo … "This does not fit with the fair trade law"

In the sector, Kim Sang-Joo's approach to strengthening criminal penalties for violation of the fair trade law of the economic society raises the problem that this does not correspond to the reality of the Law enforcement. Unlike the administrative sanctions imposed by the FTC, which emphasize the threat of a competitive market structure, the criminal sanction of prosecution lies in the illegality of the law itself. In order to make criminal punishment, it is said that the illegal act of punishment person should be concretely confirmed. The prosecutor believes that the situation can not be punished.

An attorney from HanFactory's law firm said: "A clause to judge the illegality is the existence of forced sales by the sales force, which is based on article 23, article 4 of the Fair Trade Commission. "If you do not specify sales, you will not be punished and you will not be able to win the administrative lawsuit, which is the final decision as to the opportunity to break the law."

Some people raised the issue that Kim Sang-Joo was treating the accusations of the accusation from an overly political point of view. The FTC has been heavily criticized by NGOs and the current pbadport indicates that it has not actively used the prosecution. They claimed that the FTC was paternalistic in the unfair business conduct. Kim Sang-Joo has actively promoted criminal prosecution against companies since taking office and has agreed to remove the exclusive right to sue without prosecution.

"Political intention to commit suicide, only the trust of the FTC"

The fact that retaliation by companies and executives was judged for withdrawing parts of Hyundai Mobis has also been influenced by the change in atmosphere since Kim Sangjo's inauguration.

The case was announced at the end of 2016 at the end of the General Meeting of the Chief Executive Officer of the Bureau of Market Surveillance, charged with charging the fines free of charge, but the director of the group Shin Bong-sam, appointed in last January as mayor of the Bureau of Market Surveillance, a The content of the elimination was revised in the sense of "Further investigation of the incident revealed that the evidence had been collected two times the original, changing the direction of the provision, officials said.The current director, Shin Young-ho, only dealt with the alleged case and provided support to the prosecution investigation.

Inside and outside the FTC, Kim responded that he would not say that the case was excessive because Kim was encouraging criminal charges.

The problem is that the cases so treated have been pbaded on to the prosecution and are no longer the subject of charges. The reconsideration of the suspected violation of the labeling of the disinfectant humidifier, which was controversial on the social level, is representative. After the FTC re-examined the file, which had been decided not to be finalized after the prescription and the decision, the public prosecutor finally decided to reject the file in April. Indeed, the deliberate character required for a criminal sanction has not been proven. The FTC has also criticized the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) for its neutrality rather than its impartiality.

Another lawyer from the law firm said, "Even if the FTC is actively accusing law enforcement, it can happen if the case is treated the same way now," The result will be less reliable. "