beta
(영문) 광주고등법원 2017.01.12 2016누4620

부정당업자 제재처분 취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The Defendant against the Plaintiff on April 7, 2016.

Reasons

1. Details of the instant disposition

A. On October 20, 201, the Plaintiff (former trade name: Taechik Co., Ltd., Taechik Co., Ltd., Ltd.) was an information and communications construction business, electric equipment sales business, electrical construction business, etc., and divided and merged the electrical construction license for dried Machinery Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Building Machinery”) and the electrical construction performance for 201 and the electrical construction performance for 2011.

B. On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff awarded a contract with the Defendant for the instant construction project, which was awarded a contract by the Dong Daegu Branch in 2015 (hereinafter “instant construction”). (c) On August 21, 2015, the Plaintiff was requested by the Korea Electrical Construction Association to submit an explanatory document on the Plaintiff’s electrical construction performance as to “the A new factory construction performance (e.g., KRW 55 million) reported by the newly constructed machinery before the merger.” On September 17, 2015, the Plaintiff was notified that the said electrical construction performance was based on the issuance of a false electronic tax invoice.

Accordingly, on April 7, 2016, the Defendant submitted a false document to the Plaintiff and received a successful bid for the instant construction project (hereinafter “Public Institutions Operation Act”); Article 39(2) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions; Article 15 of the Rules on Contracts to Public Corporations and Quasi-Governmental Institutions (hereinafter “Contract Affairs Rules”); Article 76(1)8 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27475, Sept. 2, 2016); Article 76(1) [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Ordinance No. 573, Sept. 23, 2016); Article 76(1) [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 5, 8, Eul evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 4-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The instant disposition is made.