본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
서울행정법원 2015.09.25 2014구합72781

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 January 24, 2011, the Defendant was designated as a “other public institution” under Article 5 of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter “Public Institutions Act”) as a company whose business objective is the development of electric resources, etc., and was changed to a “market-type public corporation” under Article 2011-1 of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance Notice.

B. (1) On July 30, 2013, the Defendant and the Plaintiff indicated the following as follows: (a) although the Plaintiff entered into a purchase agreement with the Defendant on the purchase of showers 8 and the goods of the Oil Bering (Evidence A 23) by September 26, 2013, the purchase agreement (Evidence A, No. 23, and Evidence B 3) states that “Misling” is “Misling; and (b) both the Plaintiff and the Defendant use the expression “Misling”; (c) eight items are supplied; (d) the contract amount is KRW 710,00,00 per showers, KRW 190,00 per Oising, KRW 720,000 per unit, KRW 70,000 per unit, KRW 700,000 per unit, KRW 700,000 per unit, KRW 200,000 per unit, KRW 50,000 per unit (i).

(2) On August 20, 2013, the Defendant and the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the purchase of goods with the content that “the Plaintiff supplies two propellers to the Defendant by September 25, 2013, but the contract amount is KRW 2,710,000 (excluding value-added tax).”

(hereinafter the above two propellers are “this case propellers.”

1) On September 26, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the instant bending, and submitted the test report on raw materials to the Defendant on September 26, 2013, “the test request report” in the name of Korea Metal Co., Ltd. (HBsC4) in the name of Korea Metal Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the test report on the instant bending raw materials”).

The defendant's employee submitted the plaintiff's presentation, but the reference point is the plaintiff's employee.