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 received the confirmation of direct production from the Defendant, which is a scientific device for education and experiment, on October 11, 2015 to October 10, 2017, for small and medium enterprises that engage in the business of manufacturing and selling broadcasting sound equipment, video audio-visual equipment, etc.

B. On February 5, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for purchase of procurement commodities (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Daejeon District Public Procurement Service and the Daejeon District Public Procurement Service, which is defined as “the object: 3 unit price, 52,234,290 won: contract price, 52,34, and 290 won: The delivery period: March 6, 2016; and the procuring entity and the place of delivery: the Korea Technology Education University” (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C. On June 16, 2016, the Administrator of the Public Procurement Service notified the Defendant that “The Plaintiff violated the obligation of direct production as a result of confirming that the Plaintiff supplied other products in the implementation of the instant contract, and thus the Plaintiff violated the obligation of direct production.”

On August 25, 2016, the Defendant revoked the confirmation of direct production on all products for which the Plaintiff verified direct production on the basis of Article 11(2)3, Article 11(3), and Article 11(5)3 of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprise Products and the Development of Market Support (hereinafter “Market Support Act”) and issued other products to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff failed to perform direct production with respect to the instant contract and supplied other products,” and revoked the confirmation of direct production on the basis of Article 11(2)3, Article 11(3), and Article 11(5)3 of the Act

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Gap evidence Nos. 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is 98 human resources produced by the plaintiff to an end-user institution after the conclusion of the contract of this case.