1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parts of the trial of the court of first instance, which were completely used, shall consist of the following parts from Nos. 4 to No. 8 of the trial of first instance:

1) The Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “tender or contract documents” under Article 76(1)8 of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act for the following reasons. ① The “tender or contract documents” under Article 76(1)8 of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act is deemed to be confined to documents submitted in the course of bidding and contract execution in order to determine the content and validity of the contract in light of the legislative intent, etc. of the aforementioned provision, and it is reasonable to deem that the documents submitted in the course of performing the contract are not included in the documents submitted in order to verify the proper performance of the established contractual obligation. ② Of the items subject to the instant test report, the Plaintiff did not have a contractual obligation to submit the test report to the Defendant or the Defense Agency for Technology and Quality, with respect to the remaining items except the contract number 2007-011-0163.

According to the Rules on National Defense and Quality Management, the subject of quality assurance is the Agency for Defense Technology and Quality Assurance, and the plaintiff is not obligated to submit the test report under the contract of this case, and only submitted the test report of this case to the defendant as reference material

In other words, since the Plaintiff voluntarily submitted the instant test report without any contractual obligation, it cannot be deemed as “tender or contract documents” under Article 76(1)8 of the Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act.