1. The head of the office that manages the sports facilities of the Busan Metropolitan City, which held against the Plaintiff on August 8, 2016.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the business of managing and maintaining facilities, the business of maintaining US sports facilities, and the Busan Metropolitan City Sports Facilities Management Office (hereinafter “Defendant Busan Sports Facilities Management Office”) is an affiliated agency of Busan Metropolitan City, which manages the Busan Asian World Stak Stak Stak Stak Stak, and the retired camping Office, etc.

B. B, a field agent of the Plaintiff, lent KRW 1 million on February 19, 2014 to C and public officials D, who were in charge of the maintenance, repair, supervision of government-funded construction, and selection of a negotiated enterprise, etc. of sports facilities, and received reimbursement on October 15, 2015.

On the other hand, between December 31, 2013 and January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff performed the project for the renovation and repair of a retired camping site. From November 6, 2014 to December 3, 2014, the Plaintiff performed the project for the management of the stadium and the project for the repair and repair of information in front of the office.

C. D was indicted on July 1, 2016 on the charge of bribery charges that, on April 22, 2016, from government-funded construction business operators, including B, borrowed money without any interest and due date and received indefinite financial benefits, and was convicted on July 1, 2016. The judgment became final and conclusive on October 14, 2016.

Busan District Court 2016Gohap255, Busan High Court 2016No472) d.

Busan Metropolitan City held a contract deliberation committee on July 21, 2016 and decided to restrict the participation in the Plaintiff. On August 8, 2016, the head of the Defendant’s business office notified the Plaintiff of the disposition of restricting the participation in the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff provided relevant public officials money or goods in relation to his/her duties (from August 16, 2016 to September 15, 2016).

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

On August 19, 2016, this Court suspended the enforcement of the instant disposition until the instant judgment is rendered.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion.