beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, if the court excludes the parts to be used or added as described in the following paragraph (2), and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts used or added;
A. On December 16, 2016, No. 3 of the first instance judgment, “the result of the commission of appraisal to the appraiser J of this court” was “the result of the commission of appraisal to T Co., Ltd. of the first instance court,” and No. 4 of the fourth part, No. 20 of the fourth part of the first instance judgment was amended to read “the Subcontract Act” as “the result of the commission of appraisal to T Co., Ltd. of the first instance court,” respectively.
B. The part of the first instance judgment Nos. 6, 7, 6, 7, and 11 shall be reversed as follows.
“In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to acknowledge that the Defendant provided intentionally reduced quantities to the Plaintiff during the competitive bidding process of the instant construction project, and the evidence alone submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to acknowledge this in this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, and therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is rejected.”
C. The part of the first instance judgment Nos. 7, 14, 8, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, and 5 shall be applied as follows.
“Nos. 1, 2, and 20 (including each number for those with a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), except for those with which a serial number is indicated.
According to each description, the Plaintiff participated in the competitive bid conducted by the Defendant in relation to the instant construction project with other six enterprises, and submitted a quotation of KRW 6.56,203,5825,631,296 for the instant construction project, and KRW 6.31,186,000 for the two sections (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply).
In this case, the plaintiff and the defendant have been entered into thereafter.