DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Duty of the Business Owner in the Contents(Casino) Corporation related with the Commercial Law - In the case of claim for damages of the gambler against the Kangwon Land(Supreme Ct. 2014.8.21, 2010다92438 case)

상법상 유기장콘텐츠 영업주(카지노영업주)의 주의의무에 관한 연구 -강원랜드 카지노 이용자의 손해배상청구의 경우 (대판 2014.8.21., 2010다92438 전원합의체 판결)

  • 전우현 (한양대학교 법학전문대학원)
  • Received : 2017.10.17
  • Accepted : 2017.10.24
  • Published : 2017.12.28

Abstract

This is Kangwon Land casino case due to the damages of betting money, which is likely to affect the contents industry in the future. The reason why the gambler and his family's suit is that why the manager did not control their own access or did not supervise the wagering rules. The provisions of the "Restriction on the amount of money to be paid to the casino" in the Article 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Support for the Development of the Abandoned Mine Area are not intended to increase the duty of the casino managers. It is just one of many public regulations imposed. No matter what legislation is made for public interest, it can not be considered equally in the private duty. If so, too much effort will be required to enact or amend the public law and this makes the legislative activity impossible. The Act on the Restriction on Access to the Casino shall be construed accordingly. From the point of view of economic efficiency theory, if we overestimate statutory duties (liability for compensation) excessively, the price goes up on the market, and the volume of transaction decreases drastically. This reduces the economic utility of resources in the society as a whole (total output, foreign currency acquisition amount, etc.).

Keywords

Kangwon Land Casino;Contents Industry;Gambler's Loss and Manager's Negligence;Cconomic Efficiency Theory;Adverse Effect of Reduced Volume

References

  1. 김영호, 상법총칙.상행위법, 팔마도서, 2004.
  2. 김홍기, 상법강의, 박영사, 2015.
  3. 김정호, 상법강의(상), 법문사, 2005.
  4. 神岐克郞, 商法總則.商行爲法通論, 同文舘, 1999.
  5. 이철송, 상법강의, 박영사, 2016.
  6. 최준선, 상법총칙, 삼영사, 2005.
  7. 송옥렬, 상법강의, 홍문사, 2011.
  8. 손주찬, 상법(상), 박영사, 2004.
  9. 이기수, 최병규, 상법총칙.상행위법, 박영사, 2010.
  10. 김선광, 심영, 유주선, 천경훈, 최병규, 상법요해, 피앤씨미디어, 2016.
  11. 서정갑, 改訂 商法(總則.商行爲), 日新社, 1986.
  12. 김병연, 박세화, 권재열, 상법총칙.상행위: 사례와 이론, 박영사, 2012.
  13. 손진화, 상법강의, 신조사, 2013.
  14. Richard A. Mann and Barry S. Roberts, Business Law, 13 ed., West, 2006.
  15. Kenneth W. Clarkson, Roger LeRoy Miller, Garlord A. Jentz, and Frank B. Cross, Business Law, 8th ed., 2001.
  16. David P. Twomey, Marianne Moody Jennings, and Ivan Fox, Business Law and the Regulatory Environment, West, 2001.
  17. 윤진수, 법의 해석과 적용에서 경제적 효율의 고려는 가능한가, 법경제학(이론과 응용), 도서출판 해남, p.5, 2011.
  18. 신도철, 법경제학: 방법론과 법의 제정 및 해석.적용에서의 역할, 법경제학(이론과 응용), 도서출판 해남, p.47, 2011.
  19. 은숭표, "법경제학의 입장에서 본 복합적 제도 (기업, 국가, 시스템, 시스템세계화) 및 제도선택 (시장경제와 민주주의)," 토지공법연구, 제10집, p.411, 2000.
  20. Coase, "The problem of social cost," The journal of Law and Economics, Vol.3, pp.1-44, 1960. https://doi.org/10.1086/466560
  21. 주진열, "한국 법경제학의 도전과 과제," 법경제학연구, 제11권, 제1호, p.3, p.13, 2014.
  22. 신석훈, "기업의 본질과 경쟁," 규제연구, 제15권, 제2호, p.116, 2006.