A Study on the Improvement Method on Calculating the Damages Caused by the Bid Rigging in the Construction Work

건설공사 입찰담합으로 인한 손해액 산정 개선방안 연구

  • Received : 2017.07.21
  • Accepted : 2017.09.12
  • Published : 2017.12.01


The study is concerned with providing the improvement method on making a reasonable and scientific decision on the damages accrued from the bid rigging in the construction work. According to the review on the precedent studies and decision cases on the damages caused by bid rigging, the representative problems include the insufficiency of the classification system on the damage calculation method and the omission of the necessary stage in the damage determination process. First, the improved classification system on calculating the damages caused by bid rigging is presented with the application to the bid rigging in the construction work by adding the ratio factor in addition to the damage calculation parameters such as price and cost. Second, the standard procedures organized with six stages is presented as the process required for determining the damages if the indemnification for bid rigging is claimed. The study becomes the foundation for resolving the problem with the undue burden on a party and for preventing the opportunity loss by resolving a dispute early through the improvement classification system and standard procedures presented in the study.


  1. ABA (2010). Proving antitrust damages (Legal and Economic Issues, Second Edition), American Bar Association.
  2. An, D. W. (2013). The military oil supply bidrigging concluded after 13 years...5 oil refinery companies pay 135.5 billion KRW for damages, Maeil Business Newspaper&
  3. CEPS (Center for European Policy Studies), EUR (Erasmus University Rotterdam), LUISS (2007). Making antitrust damages action more effective in the EU.
  4. Emily, C., Mat, H. and David, W. (2004). Study on the conditions of claims for damages in case of infringement of EC competition rules (Analysis of Economic Models for the Calculation of Damages), Ashurst.
  5. Hong, D. S. (2008). The actual practical issues of the damage suit under the monopoly regulation and fair trade act, Sogang University Law Management and Law Research Institute Management Law Center Management and Law Vol. 2, pp. 1-47
  6. Hong, D. S. and Kim, H. J. (2013). A study on the damages calculation, survey, and finalization criteria in the damage suit filed due to the violation of the monopoly regulation and fair trade act, 2013 Law and Economics Group (LEG) Research Report, Korea Fair Trade Mediation Agency, pp. 45-105 (in Korean).
  7. Incheon District Court (2015. 2. 13). Sentence, 2010GaHap19149 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  8. Lee, I. K. (2008). "An Empirical Analysis on the Collusion." Korea Economic Research Institute (in Korean).
  9. Lee, I. K. and Hahn, K. D. (2002). "Bid-rigging in auction for korean public-works contract and damage estimation." Journal of Economics Research, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 275-302.
  10. Marcel, B. (2015). How Much Do Cartel Overcharge? (The "Working Paper" Version).
  11. Nam, J. H., Han, C. R., Jeong, S. M. and Jo, J. H. (2013). "The Economic Analysis on Calculating the Unfair Profit of the Joint Bidrigging Act in the Seoul Subway Line 7 Extension 701-704 Zone - Case 2011GaHap26204 Damage Suit (Gi)-."
  12. Oxera (2009). "Quantifying Antitrust Damages Toward Non-Binding Guidance for Courts." The European Union.
  13. Park, E. R. (2015). "The Public Bidrigging Case, The Government Raises the Damage Suit." Available at:
  14. Park, J. P. (2015). Assessing of damages caused by the bid collusion based on Seoul Metro 7th Line construction project, Master of Graduate School of Engineering Hanyang University (in Korean).
  15. Park, S. I. (2014). The Economic Analysis on Calculating the Damages (2010GaHap19149 Damage Suit(Gi)) of the Joint Bidrigging Act in the Seoul Subway Line 7 Extension 705-706 Zone (in Korean).
  16. Seoul Central District Court (2007. 1. 23). Sentence, 2001GaHap 10682 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  17. Seoul Central District Court (2014. 1. 10). Sentence, 2011GaHap 26204 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  18. Seoul High Court (2009. 12. 30). Sentence, 2007Na25157 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  19. Seoul High Court (2016. 9. 8). Sentence, 2014Na9467 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  20. Seoul High Court (2016. 9. 8). Sentence, 2015Na10143 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  21. The Supreme Court (2011. 7. 28). Sentence, 2010Da18850 Damage Suit (Gi) Decision (in Korean).
  22. Yun, S. U. and Kang, I. (2012). The method of quantifying antitrust damages and related issues in antitrust damages actions.