직접생산확인취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a small and medium enterprise engaged in manufacturing windows, door trussess, etc.; the Defendant is an institution entrusted by the Minister of SMEs and Startups with the verification of direct production, revocation of direct production, etc. pursuant to Article 34(2) of the Act on Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and Development Support (hereinafter “Market Support Act”) and Article 27(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on
B. The Plaintiff obtained the confirmation of direct production from the Defendant in 2016 for metal fences (sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub
On the other hand, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with multiple suppliers that supply competing products directly produced by the Public Procurement Service and the procuring entity.
C. The Defendant revoked the confirmation of direct production against the Plaintiff on November 28, 2018, based on Article 11(2)3 and (3) of the Act on Support of Development of Agricultural and Fishing Villages, on the ground that the Plaintiff supplied the instant product directly produced to the Ministry of National Defense C, etc. according to the multiple suppliers agreement around 2016 and supplied it to the end-user institution.
(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff gave a subcontract to the subcontractor only during the process of manufacturing the instant product, but the instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.
1) The criteria for confirmation of direct production of competing products between small and medium entrepreneurs (No. 2018-9, the Ministry of SMEs and Startups published on January 18, 2018).