本文選題：汽車消費(fèi)市場(chǎng) + 4S模式��； 參考：《江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)體現(xiàn)著國(guó)家工業(yè)發(fā)展的水平,它的良性發(fā)展能夠有效促進(jìn)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)的騰飛,隨著科技的進(jìn)步,汽車文化已經(jīng)融入我們的日常生活。汽車服務(wù)作為整個(gè)汽車服務(wù)行業(yè)的核心而倍受人們關(guān)注。汽車銷售4S的經(jīng)營(yíng)模式進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)已有十余載,其對(duì)于推動(dòng)中國(guó)汽車市場(chǎng)的成型、發(fā)展有著不可磨滅的功勞。但相比于發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的百年汽車發(fā)展歷史,我國(guó)汽車市場(chǎng)依舊屬于起步階段,尚未成熟,正因如此,我國(guó)汽車銷售4S模式在獲得認(rèn)可的同時(shí)也伴隨著不小的爭(zhēng)議。我國(guó)汽車銷售4S模式在制度設(shè)立之初,對(duì)于提升汽車品牌價(jià)值、促進(jìn)汽車消費(fèi)、提高客戶忠誠(chéng)度方面起著關(guān)鍵的作用。但隨著2005年《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》的出臺(tái),汽車消費(fèi)市場(chǎng)主體間的不平衡性加劇,汽車廠商在產(chǎn)業(yè)鏈中逐漸成為更為強(qiáng)勢(shì)的一方,通過實(shí)施縱向壟斷協(xié)議的方式控制著汽車的銷售市場(chǎng),同時(shí),侵犯了經(jīng)銷商與消費(fèi)者的合法權(quán)益。這種模式也限制了汽車市場(chǎng)的有效競(jìng)爭(zhēng),對(duì)汽車行業(yè)的長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展產(chǎn)生了消極影響。隨著我國(guó)《反壟斷法》于2008年頒布實(shí)施,對(duì)于汽車4S模式下存在的限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)行為理應(yīng)由該法進(jìn)行規(guī)制,但由于目前法律頒布時(shí)間尚短,制度設(shè)計(jì)中尚存一些不完善之處而使行為不能得到有效規(guī)制。對(duì)于此,筆者認(rèn)為有必要借鑒法律制度更為發(fā)達(dá)的國(guó)外,諸多發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家對(duì)于汽車行業(yè)的反壟斷法律規(guī)制手段都可以作為我國(guó)汽車反壟斷法律完善的參考。具體而言,有美國(guó)對(duì)于限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)行為的“本身違法與合理”分析原則、歐盟對(duì)于壟斷市場(chǎng)比例的“安全港”制度、日本對(duì)于“不公正交易”的單獨(dú)規(guī)制等。目前我國(guó)對(duì)于汽車4S模式壟斷行為的規(guī)制中,《反壟斷法》立法本身存在缺陷;《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》加劇了市場(chǎng)中的主體失衡;相關(guān)的執(zhí)法機(jī)構(gòu)與反壟斷委員會(huì)的職能不明,令本身就存在價(jià)值沖突的壟斷行為規(guī)制更加難以實(shí)施。對(duì)此,上述域外的寶貴經(jīng)驗(yàn)就成為改變目前立法與執(zhí)法上的不完善、真正落實(shí)《反壟斷法》的重要參考因素。對(duì)于我國(guó)汽車市場(chǎng)4S模式規(guī)制亂象頻出的法律現(xiàn)狀,可以從以下幾個(gè)方面加以完善:首先,應(yīng)當(dāng)對(duì)《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》做進(jìn)一步完善,改變其對(duì)市場(chǎng)主體的不平衡規(guī)范;其次,應(yīng)當(dāng)出臺(tái)具體的《反壟斷法》實(shí)施細(xì)則,令壟斷規(guī)制落到實(shí)處;再次,可以建立反壟斷判例借鑒制度,對(duì)反壟斷權(quán)利救濟(jì)困境做進(jìn)一步解決;最后,應(yīng)當(dāng)鼓勵(lì)私人參與到反壟斷訴訟之中來,使受到壟斷行為侵害的主體的合法權(quán)利得到及時(shí)保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:Automobile industry reflects the level of national industrial development, its benign development can effectively promote the rapid development of national economy. With the progress of science and technology, automobile culture has been integrated into our daily life. As the core of the whole automobile service industry, automobile service has attracted people's attention. The 4S mode of automobile sales has been in Chinese market for more than ten years, which is an indelible credit for promoting the formation and development of China's auto market. But compared with the history of automobile development in developed countries, the automobile market of our country is still in the initial stage and not yet mature. Because of this, the 4S model of automobile sales in our country has been recognized and accompanied with a lot of controversy at the same time. At the beginning of the establishment of the system, the 4S model of automobile sales in China plays a key role in promoting the value of automobile brand, promoting automobile consumption and improving customer loyalty. However, with the introduction of the "implementing measures of Automobile Brand sales Management" in 2005, the imbalance between the main bodies of the automobile consumption market has intensified, and automobile manufacturers have gradually become a more powerful party in the industrial chain. Through the implementation of vertical monopoly agreement, it controls the sales market of automobile and infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of dealers and consumers. This mode also limits the effective competition of the automobile market, and has a negative impact on the long-term development of the automobile industry. With the promulgation and implementation of our country's Anti-monopoly Law in 2008, the restrictive competition behavior under the 4S mode of automobile should be regulated by this law, but the time of promulgation of the law is still short. There are still some imperfections in the system design which make the behavior unable to be regulated effectively. For this, I think it is necessary to draw lessons from the more developed legal system of foreign countries, many developed countries for the auto industry anti-monopoly legal regulation means can be used as a reference for the perfection of anti-monopoly laws in China. Specifically, there are the principles of "illegality and reasonableness" in the United States, the "safe harbor" system in the proportion of monopolized markets in the European Union and the separate regulation of "unfair transactions" in Japan. At present, there are defects in the legislation of "Anti-monopoly Law" in the regulation of the monopolistic behavior of 4S mode in China, and the implementing method of Automobile Brand sales Management intensifies the imbalance of the main body in the market. The function of the relevant law enforcement agencies and antitrust committees is not clear, which makes it more difficult to enforce the monopoly behavior which has value conflict. In view of this, the valuable experience mentioned above has become an important reference factor to change the imperfections of current legislation and law enforcement and to truly implement the Anti-monopoly Law. The current legal situation of 4S model of automobile market in our country can be improved from the following aspects: first, we should further perfect the measures of Automobile Brand sales Management. To change its unbalanced norms for market subjects; secondly, to issue specific detailed rules for the implementation of the Anti-monopoly Law so that monopoly regulations can be put into practice; thirdly, an antitrust precedent system can be established and used for reference. Finally, private participation in antitrust litigation should be encouraged to protect the legitimate rights of the subject who has been infringed by monopoly action.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 郭宗杰;;反壟斷視角中轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格限制的比較法研究[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2014年05期

2 蘇華;韓偉;;《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》的反壟斷分析[J];中國(guó)物價(jià);2014年01期

3 川頁;;修改和完善《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》勢(shì)在必行[J];汽車與配件;2013年37期

4 楊莉萍;;從茅臺(tái)、五糧液案看最低轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持的反壟斷法規(guī)制[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年04期

5 陳振華;;對(duì)《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》的幾點(diǎn)思考[J];中國(guó)外資;2013年01期

6 葉衛(wèi)平;;反壟斷法的價(jià)值構(gòu)造[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2012年03期

7 徐秉金;歐陽敏;;《汽車品牌銷售管理實(shí)施辦法》幫了誰的忙[J];時(shí)代汽車;2012年01期

8 卓蕾蕾;;歐盟汽車領(lǐng)域縱向協(xié)議成批豁免的制度變遷[J];時(shí)代金融;2011年26期

9 劉斌;;《反壟斷法》視野下的汽車流通[J];汽車工業(yè)研究;2009年01期

10 王秀麗;肖俊濤;;汽車銷售4S模式研究[J];湖北汽車工業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 呼斯楞;搭售領(lǐng)域的反壟斷法規(guī)制研究[D];廈門大學(xué);2014年

2 王穎;搭售行為的反壟斷法規(guī)制研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2014年

3 郭越;論我國(guó)汽車銷售4S模式縱向限制的法律規(guī)制[D];湖南大學(xué);2013年

4 陸佳歡;汽車行業(yè)縱向限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)協(xié)議的反壟斷規(guī)制[D];華東政法大學(xué);2013年

5 卓蕾蕾;論我國(guó)反壟斷法對(duì)縱向限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)協(xié)議的規(guī)制[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

6 李勇;論我國(guó)汽車行業(yè)的縱向壟斷協(xié)議及其法律規(guī)制[D];天津財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1938400