beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.27 2016누61725

시정명령등취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The status of the plaintiff et al., the plaintiff et al., the defendant company Ags Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Ags," and the name of all the company is omitted in describing the name of all the company), the Korea Testing Technology, and the Cgste Technology (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff et al.") all of the above four companies are non-destructive testing service providers who are engaged in non-destructive testing service business, and each company constitutes a business entity under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the former Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (amended by Act No. 1106, Mar. 21, 2012; hereinafter referred to as "Fair Trade

Non-destructive testing is not destroying objects of testing using physical principles such as radiation and ultra-wave, but examining the existence or absence of internal structure and defects, etc. as of October 2015, the number of non-destructive testing companies registered as non-destructive testing companies as of the end of 137 and the total sales of domestic destroyed testing companies in 2015 are estimated to be KRW 470.5 billion.

On August 2011, 201, 201, 2007, 2007 : (a) tender for non-destructive testing service unit (hereinafter “instant service tender”) was conducted in order to examine and repair the power generation facilities produced in the original factory, etc.

The bid for the instant service was conducted in the total of five stages, including ① issuance of a written request for estimate ( August 9, 201), ② submission of estimate ( August 17, 201), ③ Tender Evaluation ( August 19, 201), ④ Notice of Bidding Results ( August 23, 201), ⑤ Contract ( November 8, 201), etc.

Dusan Construction classified the non-frequency test service of a creative plant into a primary test, a primary test, and other non-destructive testing service (hereinafter referred to as the "TOFD"), and conducted a bid on condition that two or three first negotiating partners or three of them are selected to allocate the service quantity.

Accordingly, two mountain construction has passed 70 points in the assessment criteria for the actual inspection of services conducted by Auss, the plaintiff, TOFD, and other NDE, which are the service executing company of the above service.