1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff was designated as an exemplary procurement commodities pursuant to Article 9-2 of the Government Procurement Act (hereinafter “the instant product”) by the Defendant as a corporation engaging in the manufacturing business, etc. of ready-mixed products, tobacco, manufacture-sale and export business, braille floor materials, bricks and similar products, machinery, related products, etc.

On June 13, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a purchase contract (unit price contract method for a third party) under a private contract between the Defendant and each end-user institution upon the Plaintiff’s demand for the supply of the instant products from each end-user institution to the extent of the contract price, which is to be paid after actually supplied the instant products to the end-user institution.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). On the other hand, this contract is entered into with the condition of inspection of a specialized institution, which carries out the inspection of a specialized institution according to the public notice of the Public Notice of the Public Procurement Service and the execution standards publicly notified by the Public Procurement Service, and the specialized institution is entered into with the purport that it is CResearch.

The Defendant registered the instant product in the National Integrated Electronic Procurement System, and the Plaintiff agreed to supply the instant product to the D Business Office, in total, 20,520 of the contract amount of KRW 11,142,360 and the contract amount of KRW 20,520 until December 20, 2017, the Plaintiff demanded the supply of the instant product through a national master shopping mall.

On the other hand, on November 6, 2017, the C Research Director conducted an inspection on the instant product. As to the instant product, Ass. 0.037 g/L and Cu (Gui) was detected by 0.012 g/L on the instant product, the degree of the defect was determined as minor defects, and the inspection information was registered around that time.

Accordingly, on November 8, 2017, the Defendant’s inspection conducted on the Plaintiff on November 8, 2017, where the harmful substance was discovered as the result of the inspection conducted by a specialized institution, and was amended on May 24, 2018 of the former Guidelines for Quality Management of Goods Purchase Contracts by the Public Procurement Service No. 1492 (hereinafter “former Guidelines”).