logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.04.15 2013구합21663
입찰참가자격제한처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition to suspend the participation of the Plaintiff on August 23, 2013 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 3, 2009, the Defendant: A project to build intelligent traffic management systems, such as vehicle inspection devices, road front light signs, video collection systems, etc. (hereinafter “instant project”); and the construction work accordingly requires the construction work to be conducted by the Defendant: “The method of package deal tender (design and construction performance bid method, Fast-Trak) construction location (subject roads) - One-stage: distribution method (priority construction), distribution method (37km), Hannam-ro, motion, etc. - - 2: (26 km), - 3-- the construction work of the Seoul Urban Expressway Traffic Center estimate 24,60,000,000 won (including value-added tax articles) construction work of the instant section; first of all, the construction work of the instant section and the basic construction work of the first two-stage method (37 km).

B. On March 13, 2009, the Plaintiff organized the SPC Co., Ltd. and the two comprehensive construction and consortiums, and applied for the prior examination of qualifications on March 13, 2009. Meanwhile, ZEex Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “NEex”) also organized a separate consortium and applied for the prior examination of qualifications on the same day. The Plaintiff’s consortium and ZEex submitted a proposal on April 28, 2009, and was notified on May 26, 2009 that the Plaintiff’s consortium was selected as the person eligible for the prior examination of qualifications.

C. The defendant on June 10, 2009 stated that "the Seoul Special Metropolitan City announced the tender on March 3, 2009 and the bid price of the plaintiff consortium was similar to that of the project in this case where the plaintiff consortium was awarded the successful bid, ① the bid price of the plaintiff consortium and ZETex participating in the tender, and ② the details of the basic design and the design of priority construction are identical, and there is a suspicion of collusion."

arrow