1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff A”) is a company that receives a contract for construction of rental housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Defendant to remove old-age housing at the “C” site and build rental housing (hereinafter “the instant construction”). Plaintiff B is the Plaintiff’s representative director.

The defendant is a quasi-market-type public corporation as defined in Article 5 (3) 1 (b) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions.

B. Plaintiff A appointed D, an employee, as a person responsible for the instant construction site, to perform the said construction work, and D performed the overall management of the instant construction work and the settlement of expenses.

C. Around February 2019, D submitted evidentiary materials (tax invoices, etc.) to the Defendant’s Busan Ulsan District Headquarters upon settling the completion of the instant construction project.

On May 16, 2019, the Defendant's Housing Welfare Project Association of the Busan Ulsan District Headquarters made a completion settlement based on the evidence, etc. and paid the completion money to Plaintiff A.

On March 10, 2020, the defendant issued a disposition to notify the plaintiffs of the dismissal of unjust enterprisers on the following grounds:

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff A (representative: Plaintiff B) who is the subject of the Defendant’s contract for the instant construction project caused damages to the State during the course of performing the contract by fraud or other unlawful act (based on recognition), and the fact that there is no dispute over the State in the course of performing the contract, A 1-5, B 1, and

2. Whether the disposition of this case is legitimate;

A. Considering the following circumstances, the instant disposition was unlawful as it was found that the grounds for the disposition did not exist, or that it deviates from and abused discretion due to misconception of facts or violation of the principle of proportionality.

Plaintiff

A actually disbursed safety and health management expenses, etc. at issue in the instant case, such as safety management expenses, purchase of protective outfits, etc.

Plaintiff

A Employees D failed to receive tax invoices, transaction specifications, etc. concerning occupational health and safety management expenses actually disbursed due to the failure to perform accounting affairs.

Accordingly, D is likely to cause a problem when the completion of the instant construction is settled.