The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 1, 2018, the Defendant: (a) announced a unit price bid (based on 1,00 Kg/bag); (b) and (c) announced a bid price of 2018(Hah) to 2019(Sang) by a minimum successful bid method (hereinafter “instant bid”); and (b) the Plaintiff submitted a bid price of 6,400 won by indicating the bid price as KRW 6,400.

B. On August 13, 2018, the opening date of the bid, around 11:10 won, the Defendant publicly announced D Co., Ltd., which included bid amounts of KRW 66,539, as the first successful bidder of the instant bid, and announced the Plaintiff to the first successful bidder on the same day at around 14:00 of the same day.

C. On August 24, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted a letter of waiver of the contract to the Defendant, stating that “The Plaintiff shall waive all rights, such as the examination of qualifications for the successful bidder, by stating 64,000 won in writing as 6,400 won in the bid price, although the Plaintiff was selected as the successful bidder in the instant bid.”

On September 17, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to restrict the Plaintiff’s eligibility to participate in bidding for three months from September 18, 2018 to December 17, 2017, pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions, Article 15 of the Rules on Contracts of Public Corporations and Quasi-Governmental Institutions (hereinafter “Office Rules”), Article 27(1)8(b) of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter “State Contract Act”), Article 76(1)2(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 76 [Attachment Table 2] subparagraph 16(a) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, on the ground that “the contract was not concluded without good cause, even though the Defendant was selected as a successful tenderer of the instant tender.”

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【Disposition of this case’s ground for recognition of this case’s existence of no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 6, Eul’s 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that there is no ground for disposition 1 stated the bid amount in this case as "6,400 won" by mistake. The defendant's person in charge also recognized that the above amount was due to mistake and recognized that the plaintiff's first successful bidder is not the plaintiff, and thereby the plaintiff is not the plaintiff.