摘要
本文以「廣告、贈品贈獎與競爭法」為題，問題核心在於探討何謂競爭法中「競爭」之定義，並以此定義檢視現行競爭法上對於事業的各種行銷行為管制規範是否恰當。礙於篇幅，著重於討論廣告以及贈品贈獎促銷行為。 本文首先釐清何謂應有之競爭圖像，自限制競爭行為與不公平競爭行為間之關係出發，認為現行公平交易法以效能競爭作為競爭定義不夠充分，而係應建立一手段多元而自由之競爭市場。接著分別就美國、日本及我國競爭法上對於廣告與贈品贈獎相關規範進行介紹與分析。美國競爭法採取分散立法模式，其對於不實廣告規範亦散見於聯邦法規、各州州法，並以普通法累積關於欺罔的判斷原則等，而就贈品行為認為屬於市場自由競爭之一環，僅就安全、郵寄及標示上的誤導行為進行規範，贈獎行為則不問獎項金額高低一律禁止。日本競爭法上對於廣告及贈品贈獎行為主要規定於景品表示法中，並且主管機關消費者廳發布繁複詳盡行政規則對各個要件等進行說明。我國公平交易法則於第21條、第23條分別對二行為加以規定。 本文認為是否屬於不公平競爭行為而須受管制應以「該行為對消費者所產生之效用」而定，如若對消費者產生之正面效用大於負面效用則無管制必要存在，故建議將公平交易法第23條關於贈品贈獎之提供條文予以刪除，並將廣告管制之重點置於資訊傳達功能妥適達成。並認為廣告是否構成欺罔應先建立個案中相關消費者形象爾後判定。最後建議應將行為經濟學引入競爭法領域並強化消費者教育，調整執法模式與方向，協助及強化消費者進行消費選擇之能力。
並列摘要
Titled “Advertisement, Premium, Sweepstakes and Competition Law,” this study positions the definition of “competition,” examining whether existing competition laws which regulate marketing campaigns are appropriate or not. Due to space limitations, this paper emphasize on advertisement, premium and sweepstakes. First of all, this study elucidates the due image of competition. From the relation between restrictive competition and unfair competition, it’s better that defining competition as constructing a competitive market which could accept diverse and free means instead of performance-based competition as Taiwan Fair Trade Act does. In addition, this paper introduce and analyze the regulations on advertisement, premium and sweepstakes under the competition laws of the United States, Japan and Taiwan respectively. The U.S. competition law adopts a decentralized legislative model, and its regulation of false advertisements is scattered in federal statutes, state laws, and common law which cumulative judgment principles on deception. The conduct of premium is considered to be part of free competition in the market, only regulated for misleading conduct in safety, mailing, and labeling, while the conduct of sweepstakes is prohibited regardless of the amount of the prize. In Japan, advertisement, premium and sweepstakes are mainly regulated in Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations, and the competent authority, the Consumer Affairs Agency, issues complicated and detailed administrative rules to explain the various elements. Besides, the Fair Trade Law of Taiwan stipulates the two behaviors in Article 21 and Article 23. Whether a marketing practice is unfair competition or not should be determined by “the effect of the practice on consumers”. If the positive effect on consumers is greater than the negative effect, then there is no need to regulate. Therefore, we propose to delete the provision of premium and sweepstakes from Article 23 of the Fair Trade Law, and the regulation of advertisement should focus on the function of information communication. It is also suggested that whether an advertisement constitutes deception should be determined after establishing the image of the relevant consumers in the case. Finally, it is recommended that behavioral economics should be introduced into the field of competition law and consumer education should be strengthened, and the enforcement model and direction should be adjusted to assist and strengthen consumers' ability to make consumer choices.