logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.03.29 2017구합75590
입찰참가자격제한처분취소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 27, 2016, the Plaintiff operating B entered into a contract with the Republic of Korea (the Defendant) and the Army Department of the Army, which is an end-user institution, with the terms that the Plaintiff would supply the joint plate by the end of October 24, 2016 (hereinafter “instant supply contract”).

B. On March 22, 2017, the Defendant revoked the instant supply contract and reverted the contract bond to the National Treasury on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to perform the instant supply contract without justifiable grounds, and notified the Plaintiff of prior disposition to restrict his/her qualification for participation in bidding to unjust enterprisers pursuant to Article 76(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party.

C. On May 25, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to restrict the participation in a tendering procedure for six months (hereinafter “instant disposition”) with the basis provision under Article 27 of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party, and Article 76 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. The Defendant asserts that the period of restriction on the instant disposition has already expired from June 2, 2017 to December 1, 2017, and that the period of restriction on the participation in a tendering procedure has already been terminated, and thus, it is unlawful as there is no legal interest to seek revocation of the instant disposition.

The plaintiff asserts to the effect that there is a legal interest in seeking cancellation of the instant disposition, since the defendant clearly stated that the contract bond stipulated in the instant supply contract will be reverted to the National Treasury through the prior notice of disposition.

(b) Where the effective period of the administrative disposition is determined, the expiration of such period.

arrow