2017Nu78065 Revocation of the qualification to participate in competitive tendering procedures open only to small and medium enterprises, and participants

action seeking revocation of the limitation of acquisition

A Stock Company

Law Firm LLC et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

[Defendant-Appellant]

The Minister of SMEs and Startups

Attorney Lee Jong-hoon et al., Counsel for the defendant

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Guhap83891 decided October 19, 2017

September 13, 2018

October 11, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. On December 8, 2016, the defendant revoked a disposition to revoke the qualification to participate in competitive tendering process open only to small and medium enterprise proprietors and the disposition to restrict the acquisition of qualification to participate

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The grounds alleged by the plaintiff in the trial while filing an appeal do not differ from the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the first instance court, and even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court is re-examineed along with the plaintiff's assertion, the first instance court's judgment dismissing the plaintiff'

Therefore, the reasoning for the entry of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the second instance judgment as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts in height:

○ Part 9 through 15 of the judgment of the first instance court are as follows.

"B. C Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as the "Union") is a non-profit organization comprised of 47 small and medium enterprises producing concrete products, such as telegraph, fume, and B, and the members producing B are 17 enterprises including the plaintiff (the plaintiff, D Co., Ltd., E Co., Ltd., F Co., Ltd., G, H Co., Ltd., Ltd., H Co., Ltd., G Co., Ltd, I, J., Ltd., K Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., and M Co., Ltd., Ltd., Inc., Ltd., P Co., Ltd., Qu Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Q., Ltd., Ltd., and S Co., Ltd., hereinafter referred to as "member companies of this case").

Then, "The Defendants, including T, appealed against the above judgment, and the Seoul Central District Court dismissed the above appeal on February 3, 2017 (20163816) and currently the Supreme Court's appeal is pending (2017Do3426)."

The "Defendant" in the 3th sentence of the first instance judgment is the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration, who is the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration.

○ 3th of the judgment of the first instance court, "On the other hand, the Government Organization Act was amended by Act No. 14839 on July 26, 2017, and the affairs of the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration were succeeded to the defendant pursuant to Article 2(1) of the Addenda (hereinafter referred to as "defendants" without distinguishing the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration and the defendant)."

The "Act on the Development of Market Support of Domestic Areas" in the first sentence of the first instance court No. 10 is deleted.

In the first instance court's decision No. 10, the second sentence of the second sentence of the first instance court "(which constitutes "the corresponding case." is related to whether the part that changed before and after the amendment of the former Act and the former Act on the Development of Agricultural and Fishing Villages would be necessary to be revoked, such as collusion, and the part on revocation of participation eligibility and restriction on the acquisition of participation eligibility for six months under Article 4 [Attachment 1] 3 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Development of Agricultural and Fishing Villages is also applicable to the former Act on the Development of Agricultural and Fishing Villages, and it is not amended. Therefore, even if one of the former Act on the Development

○ Part 15 of the 11th judgment of the first instance court was stipulated, and the next paragraph 4 of the same article is added.

The "Act on the Development of Market Support for Local Areas" in Part 12 of the judgment of the first instance court is deleted.

○ Part 11 to 14 of the decision of the first instance court are as follows.

“C) In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s participation in the instant collaborative act and the bid price is at least KRW 24,081,342,845, the bid price is at least KRW 24,081,342,845, and the instant collaborative act was organized and repeated, thereby resulting in the result that the competition itself is entirely excluded from the government-funded market of B designated as a competitive item, etc., the possibility of criticism on the instant collaborative act is large.

The Act on the Development of Market Support in Part 13 of the Decision of the first instance court is different from the "former Act on the Development of Market Support".

3. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

The presiding judge, the whole judge;

Judges Min Il-young

Judges Lee Jae-in