1. The Defendant’s revocation disposition of direct production verification against the Plaintiffs on August 26, 2014 shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The parties 1) Plaintiff Han Liberex Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Han Liber”)

The purpose of this is to manufacture and process veterinary rubber, etc., and Plaintiff Digital Tech Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Digital Tech”)

(2) Pursuant to Article 34(2) of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Support for Development of Agricultural and Medium Enterprises (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”), the Defendant is an institution entrusted by the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration with the duties of confirming direct production, issuing a certificate of direct production, cancelling direct production, and implementing a hearing, etc., pursuant to Article 27(1)2 and 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Support of Development of Agricultural and Medium Enterprises (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”).

B. Pursuant to the main sentence of Article 9(4) of the Act, Article 5(3) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Support of Development of Market Support (hereinafter “Enforcement Rule”), the Plaintiffs were issued a certificate of direct production verification related to rubber sporacing materials (sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-subsub-sub

C. The Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration conducted on-site surveys at the Plaintiffs’ factory from July 2, 2014 to the fourth day of the same month. As a result, ① the Plaintiff Han-rox did not build a pressure-emitting cooling equipment on the installation of a pressure-generating cooling equipment, not a pressure-generating equipment, and ② the Plaintiff Di-Tech did not build a pressure-generating cooling equipment, ② the construction of the Plaintiff Di-Tech did not meet the construction of the pressure-generating cooling equipment, ③ the Defendant did not meet the direct production verification criteria on July 22, 2014, and ② the Defendant revoked direct production verification of the Plaintiffs on July 22, 2014 pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Act.