2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On October 15, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition to suspend the participation in the tendering procedure for four months from October 23, 2013 to February 22, 2014 by applying Article 27(1) of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter “State Contract Act”) and Article 76(1)7 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act to the Plaintiff Company A and the Plaintiff B, who is its representative director, for the reason that the collusion was conducted for the successful bid of a specific person in the competitive bidding on the 32 sections (Gu, US, resident, and sexual district) of the Nakdong River Project.

B. The Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition, and filed an application for the suspension of execution of the instant disposition with this Court 2013da10301, and received the ruling of acceptance on October 30, 2013.

C. On August 13, 2015, the Government announced the “Special Amnesty and Special Reduction and Exemption Measures” (hereinafter “Special Reduction and Exemption Measures”) to release a construction company and construction engineer from a disposition of administrative sanctions, such as restrictions on participation in the tendering procedure (including bid reduction points) as of August 14, 2015.

On August 25, 2015, the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, etc. publicly announced the specific guidelines on the scope of cancellation of administrative sanctions against construction enterprises, etc. (hereinafter “instant guidelines”) among the special reduction and exemption measures in this case. The main contents are as stated in the “main contents of the instant guidelines.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

(a) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes;

B. The latter part of Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that even after the effect of the disposition, etc. is extinguished due to the lapse of the period, the execution of the disposition, etc. and other reasons, a person who has legal interest in restitution due to the cancellation of the disposition, etc. may file a lawsuit for cancellation.

A revocation suit shall be an unlawful disposition.