2. All the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

피고 장성군은 2015. 12. 9. ‘공사명: 덕산지구 지표수 보강개발사업(이하 ’이 사건 공사‘라 한다), 입찰방법: 총액입찰, 입찰참가자격: 지방자치단체를 당사자로 하는 계약에 관한 법률(이하 ’지방계약법‘이라 한다) 시행령 제13조 및 같은 법 시행규칙 제14조의 요건을 갖추고, 건설산업기본법에 의한 종합공사업 중 토목공사업 또는 토목건축공사업 면허를 보유 등록한 업체로서 입찰공고일 전일부터 입찰일(낙찰자는 계약일)까지 주된 영업소의 소재지가 전라남도 내에 소재해야 하며, 지정된 기일 내에 전자입찰 등록을 필한 업체이어야 합니다’는 내용으로 공사입찰을 공고하였다.

As a result, in a bid conducted by Defendant Aju Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Aju Construction”), Defendant Aju Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Aju Construction”), assessed the bid amount of KRW 4,198,299,99 as the first order, the Plaintiff’s bid amount of KRW 4,199,025,70 as the second order, and Defendant Aju Construction decided as the highest bidder. Accordingly, Defendant Aju Construction Co., Ltd entered into the instant construction contract with Defendant Aju Construction Co., Ltd.

Meanwhile, on January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendants for a provisional order for the suspension of construction. However, on June 8, 2016, the court dismissed the said application on the ground that “The Duyang office, the head office of which is the location of the Defendant’s principal office, is not a minimum entity as a business office, and it is difficult to readily conclude that such defect is serious to the extent that the public nature and fairness of the tender procedure in this case is substantially infringed on.”

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff's assertion of facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1, 2, Eul's evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings is restricted to the plaintiff's participation in the construction contract of this case as the main business office within the jurisdiction of the City/Do where the construction site is located under the Local Contract Act, the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.