초록

용어보기논문에서 용어와 풀이말을 자동 추출한 결과로, 시범 서비스 중입니다. AI-Helper

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

In France, since early this century, electronic communications and broadcasting administration has been subject to a major change due to technological development towards a convergence and EU legislation. Its path has been directed to the establishment of fair competition in the markets through a ...

In France, since early this century, electronic communications and broadcasting administration has been subject to a major change due to technological development towards a convergence and EU legislation. Its path has been directed to the establishment of fair competition in the markets through a horizon regulation and to the harmonization of public interests by maintaining the existing public service law. To achieve this goal, the regulatory agencies for the electronic communications and broadcasting sectors strive to guarantee “the credibility” of the regulatory function and to instil a feeling of trust among investors through a multi-dimensional separation of their functions. For regulatory compliance and enforcement, the same effort has been made to protect the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 6 of the E.C.H.R. by establishing a strict adversary system. This article is to examine and compare the administrative organization and the compliance and enforcement procedures of the ARCEP and the CSA in France so as to find an ideal model of regulatory enforcement system for the Korea Communications Commission. Accordingly, it first examined the organizational structures of the two institutions, and then the fiercely debated issue of earlier days was looked after. That is, among others, the constitutionality of the quasi-judicial ARCEP. Next, the regulatory compliance and enforcement procedures of the ARCEP were examined. The ARCEP and the CSA both have adopted the adversarial system in their regulatory compliance and enforcement procedures. Their procedures are in general very similar but also show some differences due to the distinct natures and practices of the two industries. Here, their differences were described and so are the measures which the two regulatory agencies have designed to guarantee the procedural fairness. Finally, based on these analyses, some implications were suggested for the KCC to better improve its regulatory compliance and enforcement procedures.

주제어