1. The Defendant’s improper businessman for three months (from October 22, 2014 to January 21, 2015) against the Plaintiff on October 15, 2014.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 28, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply up to December 20, 2012 22 items, including the Defendant and the Nagas (K-1 electric car) to the KRW 6,983 of the contract amount of KRW 6,150,000,000.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

On December 17, 2012, the Plaintiff’s employee A connected to the KPA website and submitted the test report on 22 items of the instant contract. The Plaintiff found that the test report on “bag, fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-fag-g-fag-f-g-g-set type (hereinafter “instant parts”) among the instant contract goods was not prepared, and that the test report on “the instant parts” (hereinafter “the instant parts”) was not prepared. The Plaintiff submitted the results of the test report from “CT09-41463” to “CT09-3294” to “the results of cT09-3294, 4329DIN 10 x 90 x 5305 x 5305 N1-N305 x 5305 x 5305 N1”.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant test report”) c.

On December 18, 2012, the Plaintiff supplied all the instant contract goods to the Defendant.

On October 25, 2014, the Defendant: (a) Article 27(1) of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party on the ground that the test report of the instant part was forged or altered (hereinafter “State Contracts Act”); (b) Article 76(1)8 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26321, Jun. 22, 2015; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act”); (c) Article 76(1)8 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party; and (d) Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance on November 4,