1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

. Details of the disposition; and

A. The Plaintiff was a legal entity established on March 4, 201 and engaged in the business of installing, maintaining, and repairing elevators, and was confirmed directly production by the Defendant on March 2017, with the term of validity for elevator products (sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub

B. On April 19, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Public Procurement Service to supply an elevator at the construction site of Seopo-si C, and manufactured and supplied one elevator under the said contract.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant elevator”) the said elevator supplied by the Plaintiff is C.

On September 6, 2017, the Public Procurement Service inspected direct production of the instant elevator. On the same day, the Plaintiff prepared a confirmation document stating that “The name of the contract: C Corporation, us shall request the said construction to the KCA and deliver the said construction work after requesting the KCA to the KCA and the KCA (* the part of the car platform adjoining us) and us shall obtain registration for the elevator manufacturing business that directly produces the car press, the car platform, and the balance press.”

On September 18, 2017, the Defendant conducted an investigation into whether the verification of direct production was violated upon the request for revocation of the verification of direct production by the Public Procurement Service. On September 22, 2017, the Defendant submitted a written opinion by September 22, 2017, and notified the Plaintiff to attend the hearing on September 28, 2017.

On September 19, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to postpone the deadline for submitting documents and the hearing date, and the Defendant postponed the hearing date on October 11, 2017.

However, the plaintiff did not appear on the date of the postponed hearing.

E. The Defendant did not directly produce an elevator and produced the external product by asking the car platform processing, the car frame, and the balance press.