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 May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff was selected as a successful bidder at a general competitive bid with regard to “three government control tower chains” conducted by the Gyeongnam Regional Procurement Service under the Defendant’s jurisdiction upon the request for the purchase of goods by the Maritime Defense Headquarters (hereinafter “demanding Agency”) and entered into a contract with the Defendant for the purchase of goods (hereinafter “contract title”): 534,51,580 won: On November 30, 2014: On-the-spot delivery condition: On-site installation: the Maritime Defense Headquarters’s inspection agency and the inspection agency: A procuring entity (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. Around November 17, 2014, the Plaintiff supplied and installed one container at the control tower of the naval wooden Baba, which is the place of delivery under the instant contract. On November 20, 2014, the Plaintiff entered one container at the naval Sea Base Control tower of the Navy, but failed to bring the container at the naval port control tower of the Navy.

C. On December 23, 2014, an end-user institution rendered a decision of failure and ordered the Plaintiff to correct the failure on the ground that the technical inspection on the container supplied to the control tower is not properly transmitted and received between the control tower and the aircraft.

After January 22, 2015 and February 3, 2015, an end-user institution issued an additional technical inspection on two occasions, but all failed.

(hereinafter referred to as "technical inspection of this case", including the technical examination of this case three times.

On February 13, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the cancellation of the instant contract on the ground that he/she failed to perform the contract without justifiable grounds at the request of the procuring entity, and on the same ground, on June 18, 2015, rendered a disposition restricting the Plaintiff’s qualification for participation in bidding for nine months.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case"). . [Grounds for recognition] . [In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 14, 16, 27 and 32, each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Attached Form 2 of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;