Defendant : The misunderstanding of facts is a corporation separate from Defendant C, which is operated by Defendant D, the same person as the defendant, and the obstruction of bidding is established when all the participants in the bidding participated in collusion. However, there was a little communication between Co., Ltd and F on bid prices.

Even if the number of participating companies is very small compared to the total number of participating companies, so it cannot affect the actual unit price of bidding, so fairness of bidding is not undermined.

Nevertheless, since the court below pronounced guilty of the facts charged in this case, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Prosecutor: The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

Judgment

The crime of interference with the legal tender on the determination of mistake of facts by the defendant does not require that the unfairness of the result is established when the fairness of bidding is harmed by deceptive means, threat of force, or other means, and in this context, the term “act of impairing the fairness of bidding” means the act of causing a situation in which fair competition is likely to be impeded, that is, giving rise to an unfair influence on the formation of reasonable price through fair competition, and includes not only the act of determining the price, but also the act of impairing the lawful and fair competition methods.

In addition, the so-called collaborative act is not necessarily to be committed to interfere with the so-called collaborative act such as manipulating the highest bidder or participating in the competition in collusion with each other to choose a certain person among them below or above a certain price to become a successful bidder, or to waive the bidding, etc., and it does not necessarily require collusion with all the participants in the bidding.