1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company whose purpose is to conduct electronic commerce transactions, etc.

The Army Headquarters under the defendant's jurisdiction publicly announced a bid for the purchase of telecommunication electronic parts, and the plaintiff was awarded a bid in the bidding procedure.

B. On November 1, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Army Headquarters concluded a purchase contract with the content that the Plaintiff would supply 39 types of telecommunication electronic parts, including the stable electricity, to KRW 43,900,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) until November 30, 2012.

C. The Plaintiff completed the supply of Class 24 among the instant contract goods, but failed to supply the remainder of Class 15, and the Defendant concluded the instant contract with the Army Headquarters on June 3, 2014 and subsequently did not comply with the instant contract without justifiable grounds (from June 17, 2014 to November 16, 2014) for five months (from November 2014, 2014).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) completed the supply of Category 24 among the contract goods of this case, and did not complete the supply of Category 15, such as franchise posters. However, this is caused by an error in the course of the defendant's installation and operation even though the plaintiff supplied franchise posters in accordance with the specifications designated by the contract of this case. Since then, the plaintiff repeated the purchase and delivery of new franchise posters over three times at the defendant's request, and it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff failed to perform the contract of this case. 2) The plaintiff did not perform the contract of this case.