beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and the Collaborative Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Cooperation Development”) are companies established for the purpose of cleaning service business, etc., and the Defendant is a company that carries out business such as the management, operation, maintenance, repair, etc. of the Incheon State Supply Clause.
B. On February 21, 2017, the Defendant publicly announced a bidding notice to place an order to provide T1 passenger terminal environmental aesthetic services (hereinafter “instant bidding notice”) (hereinafter “instant bidding notice”), stating that “the person who selected the lowest bidder below the estimated price as a result of the price bidding and determined as the successful tenderer at least 85 points in the order of bidders at the lowest price below the estimated price as the successful tenderer,” and the Plaintiff and the Collaborative Development bid bid for the instant service.
C. On March 6, 2017, the Defendant selected 13 companies, including the Plaintiff and the development of the cooperative (13 companies, including the first-class general management of the Co., Ltd., the second-class Co., Ltd., the second-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the fourth-class Co., Ltd., the fourth-class Co., Ltd., the fourth-class Co., Ltd., the fifth-class Co., Ltd., the sixth-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd., the third-class Co., Ltd
Therefore, only five companies including the plaintiff and the co-development (Ss. 2, 3, 8, 11, 12, 12) submitted the qualification examination documents to the defendant.
Acquisition of allocated limit for examination items in the field of classification;
Ⅰ. The ratio of the performance of similar services and similar services to the scale of the performance of the service in question during the last five years to the scale of the performance of the service in question shall not exceed 10 management status 10, 25 23.8, 25, 4.0 and 5 points 4.0 points and 5 points 2.5 points and 35 points 35 points 2.35 points Ⅱ. The adequacy of the implementation plan of the working conditions 33.36 points 7.6.