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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, a company engaged in the electrical construction business, was merged with the passenger test (hereinafter “the passenger test”) in around 2012, and the Defendant is an electrical construction business entity established under the Electrical Construction Business Act.

B. On December 4, 2014, the Plaintiff participated in the “the 2015 and the 2016 Masan-B Local Tender by the Cooperation Company for Power Distribution and Construction,” which was established by the Korea Electric Power Corporation, and was selected as a successful bidder following a qualification examination.

C. However, the Sejong Electric Power Co., Ltd., a person subject to priority examination, filed an objection with the Plaintiff to the effect that the Defendant’s actual results of electrical construction and detailed statement submitted by the Plaintiff during the process of examining the qualification (hereinafter “instant actual results confirmation Board”) are false.

Accordingly, the Korea Electric Power Corporation requested the Defendant to verify the fact of the actual results of the instant electrical construction, and on December 4, 2014, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to submit to the Defendant documents, such as a sales invoice and sales invoice, which the Plaintiff may submit to the Defendant, including the Plaintiff’s sales invoice and sales invoice, to verify the actual results. The Defendant reviewed the documents submitted by the Plaintiff and submitted to the Korea Electric Power Corporation on the 22th of the same month, which included the false report among the confirmation sources of the instant performance, and thus, the notification of the fact that the Korea Electric Power Corporation completed the revaluation of the execution capacity.

A. Before 200:

E. On December 22, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the result of revaluation of the appraised value of the execution capacity in 2014. The content of the Plaintiff’s electrical construction performance was 5 cases in 2009, 210 cases in 2010, 13 cases in 2011, and 7 cases in 2012, which were reported differently from the fact. The remainder of the reduced construction works, excluding one case, was all merged with the Plaintiff.

(f).