A comparative study on anti-dumping laws in the EU and Korea in the context of international rules
Despite the fact that the Commission of the European Community has made Korea one of three main target countries of anti-dumping measures, because Korea is pressing to export more of the electronics products which the Community is struggling to protect, study of the Community Antidumping Law in Korea has barely begun. Therefore, in this thesis, the measures that may be imposed by Community authorities with respect to trade with countries not members of the European Community, especially with Korea, under the Community Anti-dumping Regulation, in the context of the GATT Anti-dumping system are explained and analysed. With regard to the Community's anti-dumping rules, protectionist bias in their application is examined, in particular the determination of normal value and export price, constructed normal value and constructed export price, the comparison of normal value and export price, the calculation of dumping margin, and the determination of injury, and proposals are made as to the extent to which the Community anti-dumping rules need to be revised to diminish the bias in their range that explicitly favours Community producers and a finding of dumping, in the context of the GATT rules. With regard to the Korean Anti-dumping rules, on the other hand, they are introduced, generally. Anti-dumping measures in Korea have not been applied properly in favour of Korean producers, mainly because of the lack of transparency and institutional inertia. Therefore, enactment of a special Act governing anti-dumping complaints, modelled on a unitary system rather than a bifurcated system, should be considered for the transparent and speedy investigations. Institutional inertia must be rectified, i.e., more precise definition is required in some terminologies, and provisions on cumulation and anti-circumvention should have been prescribed before their application. Through a comparative study of the anti-dumping laws in the Community and Korea, it becomes clear that various aspects of the technical methodology applied by the authorities in anti-dumping determinations have a tendency to make findings of dumping largely automatic and inevitable. Therefore, it must always be borne in mind that anti-dumping measures can be imposed only where dumping and resulting injury is actually established, not artificially. This study has looked at anti-dumping laws in the Community and Korea comparatively, in the context of the GATT Anti-dumping rules. The Community refers to GATT and the Code in the preamble of its anti-dumping regulation, which has no binding effect in Court, and adopts the regulation in accordance with existing international obligations, in particular those arising from Article VI of the GATT and from the GATT Anti-dumping Code. However, this does not ensure an interpretation in conformity with GATT rules and its spirit, because the wording of the GATT anti-dumping rules taken literally is very ambiguous and can be interpreted very differently. Therefore, a comparative study with the Community's antidumping rules and its practice as a legislative model should be very helpful, in order to improve the current Korean anti-dumping system, because the GATT anti-dumping rules can play a very limited role only as a guideline.