1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 20, 2012, the Plaintiff contracted the “B installation work” ordered by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction work”) and was doing construction work from February 22, 2012 to February 31, 2013.

On September 5, 2012, C, a field director of the Civil Works among the instant construction works, as the Plaintiff’s employee, delivered KRW 2 million to D, E, and F (hereinafter “D, etc.”) who is the Defendant’s employee in charge of supervising the instant construction works.

B. Grounds for the Defendant’s restriction on participation in a tendering procedure against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) (Article 39(2) and (3) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions, Article 15 of the Rules on Contracts to Public Corporations and Quasi-Governmental Organizations), and Article 76(1)10(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party: Grounds for sanctions from July 1, 2013 to March 3(3): Two million won in relation to the instant construction project.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1, 2, 4, 20 evidence, Eul's evidence 8 (including each number), Eul's witness C's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. To make entries in the attached statutes concerned;

3. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 2 and 3 as to procedural defects, the defendant requested the plaintiff to state his opinion in advance on or around June 11, 2013, and the plaintiff can recognize the fact that he submitted his opinion in writing to the defendant on or around the 13th of the same month. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that there is a procedural defect that the defendant did not provide the plaintiff with an opportunity to explain or state his opinion before rendering the instant disposition, is not acceptable.

B. (1) In order to restrict the qualification for participation of unjust enterprisers in bidding with respect to a contract ordered by a government-invested public enterprise, etc. with respect to substantive defects, “it is obvious that it would interfere with fair competition or appropriate implementation of a contract.”

. Matters concerning the operation of public institutions.