logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.04.10 2013가합27881
입찰무효 통보 무효확인 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) The Defendant’s Public Procurement Service’s bid announcement and proceeding process is entrusted to Jeju City, and around December 2012, 2012, on a bid for the construction work at the Jeju-si Alternative Do (A-Do) under Article 201210668-00 of the Public Notice of Facilities of the Public Procurement Service’s Public Notice of Facilities (hereinafter “instant bid”).

2) A public notice was given that the construction subject to prior examination of participation in the bid is limited to eligible persons as a result of that prior examination (see Articles 2.1 and 3.1 of the Notice of Tender Notice) and that participation in the tender of this case must be registered on the National Integrated Electronic Procurement System (hereinafter referred to as the “Procurement System”).

(See Article 3.2.2.3 of the Public Notice of Tender) In the public notice of this case, the public notice of this case includes "in the case of an enterprise (at least two representatives), all the representatives shall be registered when the qualification for participation is registered, and if only one person is registered at the present time, registration of modification shall be made, and in the case of a person participating in the tender without registration of modification, the person who participates in the tender without registration of modification shall be subject to disposition of invalidity of the tender pursuant to Article 42.5 of the Enforcement Rule

(See Notice of Tender Notice No. 3.4.4.4.4) The Plaintiff’s equity ratio of 51% and B stock company (hereinafter “B”) around December 2012.

Section 49 per cent of the shares of the joint contractors (hereinafter referred to as "joint contractors for the plaintiff").

(2) On January 31, 2013, the Plaintiff’s representative director was selected as C and D2 from January 2008, but C died on October 22, 2009. The Plaintiff’s representative director was selected as C and D2. The Plaintiff’s death on October 22, 2009.

On January 8, 2013, the Plaintiff was the representative director of C and D in the Plaintiff’s corporate register.

arrow