The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Interpretation and application of the part concerning “other employees” under Article 76(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (ground of appeal Nos. 1 and 4)

A. Article 27(1) of the former Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Act No. 14038, Mar. 2, 2016; hereinafter “State Contract Act”) provides that a person who is deemed likely to undermine the fair enforcement of competition or the proper implementation of contracts, or inappropriate to participate in a tender (hereinafter “unfair businessman”) shall be restricted from participating in the tender within the extent of two years, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 76(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party upon delegation (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27475, Sep. 2, 2016; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the State Contract Act”) provides that “Where a party to a contract, bidder, etc. (hereinafter “party to a contract, etc.”) or the agent, manager or other employee of the other party to the contract, etc. falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the other party to the contract, etc. shall be restricted from participating in bidding.” The proviso to the proviso provides that “Where an agent, manager or other employee of the other party to the contract, etc. commits any of the following acts and the other party to the contract, etc. has not been negligent in giving due attention and supervision in order to prevent such act, this shall not apply:

In addition, sub-paragraph 8 of the same paragraph shall include documents relating to tendering or contract.