1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "other than the addition of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the corresponding part among the judgment of the court of first instance, and the defendant's assertion in the court of first instance, it is identical to the entry that excludes "the suspension of execution of the disposition of this case" part of the judgment of the court of first instance, i.e., "the suspension of execution" part of the judgment of the court of first instance, i.e., Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus,

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance court, the term "C" in Part 10 shall be changed to "C".

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff violated the contract of this case caused non-destructive testing to the employees belonging to the plaintiff, who are not qualified, in violation of the contract of this case. Accordingly, the non-destructive testing report, which is related documents, was forged and submitted to the defendant. Even if any result or damage was not actually caused, as long as each act itself has an inherent abstract risk, it is reasonable to deem that it constitutes an obvious case that it would prejudice the proper implementation of the contract of this case. Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, but if there are other circumstances that can be considered in the process, it is sufficient to consider

B. Therefore, in full view of the health unit, Article 39 of the Public Institutions Act, Article 15 of the Rules on Contract Affairs, and Article 76(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act, which are the basis laws for the disposition of this case, it shall not be deemed as the subject of disposition, since it is evident that if it falls under any of the subparagraphs of Article 76(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act, it would immediately harm the proper implementation of the contract, and it shall not be deemed as the subject of the disposition. This is only based on the public institution law