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 June 23, 2017, the Government Procurement Service affiliated with the Republic of Korea publicly announced the bid for “the instant bid” (hereinafter referred to as “instant bid”).

The written notice of the tender of this case requires that one of the qualifications for participation shall be a person who has a record of manufacturing and supplying a floodgate 16 tons or more of the authorized capacity (limited to "Drum Wye Type"; hereinafter referred to as "Hydrological rights") under a single contract within the last five years as of the date of the public notice of the tender, and requires that the person who intends to participate in the tender shall submit an application for performance review and documents evidencing the performance.

The Plaintiff participated in the instant bidding, and as a result of opening on July 7, 2017, the Plaintiff was selected as the subject of the first-class contract performance evaluation, and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) as the subject of the second-class contract performance evaluation.

B. On July 13, 2017, D filed a provisional injunction against the Republic of Korea with the Daejeon District Court to the effect that “D shall temporarily determine the status of a person subject to the ability to perform the contract in the instant tender, and Korea shall not conclude a contract with a third party other than D with respect to the instant tender nor perform the contract with a person other than D,” and the Plaintiff participated in the said case as a supplementary intervenor of the Republic of Korea.

On December 11, 2017, the Daejeon District Court (2017Kahap50233) rendered a decision to accept the application for provisional disposition of D on the ground that “it is unreasonable that the Republic of Korea does not exclude the plaintiff from those subject to the determination of successful bidder and recognizes the plaintiff as the person subject to the examination of the ability to perform the contract,” although it is judged that there was no actual production and delivery of the floodgate that the plaintiff prescribed as the qualification for participation in the bidding of this case as the qualification for participation in

Although the Plaintiff filed an objection against the above decision, the Daejeon District Court (2017Kahap50465) rendered a decision to authorize the above decision on January 16, 2018, and thereafter, the Daejeon High Court of Appeals (2017Kahap50465).