직접생산확인 취소처분 취소 청구의 소
1. The Defendant’s revocation of direct production verification against the Plaintiff on February 28, 2017 shall be revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff used the Plaintiff Company B’s trade name and changed the trade name to A on May 11, 2016. Pursuant to Article 9(4) of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Development of Market Support (hereinafter “Market Support Act”), the term of validity was verified by the Defendant as to “specific drainage route” and “specific block” from February 4, 2016 to February 3, 2018.
The names of end-user Korea Rural Community Corporation D, E, and F branch D, B, MW200-1, 1,050-1, 2,000 x 2,000 x 2,000 x x 2,000 x waterway, 480,90 x 130 x 62,517,00 x 320,710 x 62,837,710 x 28 February 28, 2016.
On December 18, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with concrete drainage method (hereinafter “instant contract”) which is competing products between small and medium enterprises and small and medium enterprises (hereinafter “instant contract”) by means of a negotiated contract with respect to “C business” ordered by the Gyeongnam Local Government Procurement Service.
The specific contents of the above supply contract shall be as follows:
C. According to the instant contract, the Plaintiff supplied a concrete drainage route (hereinafter “instant drainage route”) to the Korea Rural Community Corporation Korea Special Metropolitan City Headquarters D, E, and F Branch (hereinafter “demanding Agency”) as an end-user institution.
On February 28, 2017, following prior notice and hearing procedures, the Defendant revoked the confirmation of direct production of all products for which the Plaintiff was verified directly, on March 7, 2017, on the ground that “the Plaintiff produced the instant drainage route through H producing the concrete drainage route with the trade name “G” (hereinafter “G”) for the instant contract, and supplied the instant products not directly produced to the end-user institution.”
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). 【The ground for recognition” has no dispute, and the number of evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 5 has been numbered.