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 why this court should explain are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except to dismiss or add each corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The Defendant, a public institution subject to the Act on the Management of Public Institutions, b. The Defendant, as a public institution subject to the Act on the Management of Public Institutions, shall be determined on the basis of whether it constitutes “a person who is obviously likely to undermine fair competition or appropriate implementation of contracts,” rather than whether it falls under Article 15(1) of the Rules of this case, and whether it is legitimate to determine whether it constitutes “a person who is obviously likely to interfere with fair competition or appropriate implementation of contracts,” which is the reason for the restriction on participation in bidding under Article 39(2) of the Public Institutions Act.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that whether the disposition of this case is legitimate should be determined not by the State Contracts Act but by the corresponding provision of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, considering the fact that the defendant, in constructing and managing railroad facilities, the state act as an agent of the State was replaced by the announcement of the construction of this case or the disposition of this case by the Act applicable to the announcement of the construction

However, Article 2 of the Public Institutions Act provides that the Act shall take precedence over the application of the Act on Contracts to Public Institutions, except when the Act on Contracts to Public Institutions provides otherwise than the Act on Contracts to Public Institutions. In the case of a disposition restricting participation in bidding, the Act on Contracts to Public Institutions does not provide that the Act on Contracts to Public Institutions shall take precedence over the State Contracts Act.