2...

A. On November 1, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) manufactured and sold steel-frames, etc. for the formation of the floor board of a building without a brine, and entered into a purchase contract for the procurement commodities prescribed by the Defendant from January 10, 2014 to January 9, 2016 (the term of contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is from January 10, 2014 to January 10, 2016 (the method by which the Plaintiff registered the clast in the national electronic electronic procurement site, which is the national electronic procurement site in which the Defendant operates, supplied the clast at the request of each procuring entity; and (b) entered into a contract for the purchase of the clast (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”).

B. On December 1, 2015, the Defendant confirmed that the weight per unit length does not meet the KS standard as a result of quality inspection on the double-type iron bars (D13) supplied by the Plaintiff, and on July 21, 2016, the Defendant: (a) confirmed that the Plaintiff constitutes “a person who, in the performance of a contract, committed an improper or unjustifiable act” (amended by Act No. 14038, Mar. 2, 2016; hereinafter “former State Contracts Act”); (b) Article 27(1) of the former Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27475, Sept. 2, 2016; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act”); and (c) Article 76(1)1 and (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act; and (d) Enforcement Rule of the same Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 373, Sept. 23, 2016).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence 1, Eul’s evidence 1-1, 2, Eul’s evidence 4-6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

(a) annex the relevant laws and regulations;