1. The Defendant’s six months (from April 17, 2016 to October 16, 2016) against the Plaintiff on April 7, 2016.

Details of the disposition

On October 8, 2014, the Plaintiff was a company with the purpose of electrical construction business, etc. located in Pyeongtaek-dong 21-dong 7-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do, and divided and merged the electrical construction license and the performance of electrical construction in 2009-2014.

around September 2015, the Defendant received notice from the Cheongbuk-do Association of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Korea Electrical Construction Association”) that totaling KRW 4,998,841,00 of the performance of construction works, including the services for maintaining and managing common facilities, cannot be recognized as the performance of electrical construction. On April 7, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the fact that “the Plaintiff submitted false documents in connection with low-tension construction works to the Plaintiff in 2015 and received a successful bid” (hereinafter “Public Institution Operation Act”); Article 39(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions and Quasi-Governmental Institutions (Amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 571, Sep. 12, 2016); Article 15 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to which the State is a Party (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 27475, Sep. 2, 2016); Article 76(1)8 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on Contracts No. 1630, supra (amended by Ordinance No. 16. 16.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings is legitimate, and the plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of disposition of the overall purport of the pleadings is the plaintiff's participation in the bidding after trusting the performance of the UNC Electric Construction, which is recognized by the Korea Electrical Construction Association, and succeeded to the performance, and it does not constitute "a case where it is judged that it would prejudice fair competition or proper implementation of contracts" as stipulated in Article 39 (2) of the Public Institutions Operation Act. Thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.