beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2017.11.24 2017누4704

부정당업자 제재처분 취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant’s status 1) Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter “Public Institutions Management Act”).

) As a market-based public corporation designated as a public entity under Article 4, B of Italian nationality (hereinafter referred to as “B”) for the stable supply of gas to the public.

(2) From December 2000, the Plaintiff imported parts, etc. for the repair of the pressure instruments from B from the company to the Defendant, and sold them to the Defendant.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a supply contract and an import declaration completion certificate (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with the Defendant at least five times each year from March 14, 201 to May 26, 2015, on five occasions each year, and the Plaintiff sells materials, etc. used to repair pressure engines to the Defendant by means of a negotiated contract (hereinafter “instant supply contract”).

In the process of concluding a private contract, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant materials proving the exclusive domestic power of representation of B in order to conclude the private contract, and all of the materials are signed by “C” in the agency column for B, but from January 4, 2010 to January 4, 2015, the term of contract is only “C” as stated “from January 4, 2010 to January 5, 2015 to January 4, 2015” as “from January 5, 2015 to January 4, 2020.”

(2) The Defendant: (a) conducted a self-inspection of the contractual status from June 22, 2015 to July 10, 2015; and (b) requested B to verify the instant A wartime contract; (c) from Company B, the Defendant responded to the effect that “the instant A wartime contract was forged; (d) the Plaintiff appears to have been transferred to Company B, but is not a contracting party in the form of monopoly contract.”

3. On the other hand, around June 2015, the plaintiff requested the defendant's audit team to submit an import declaration certificate on the products supplied around 2014.