1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff is a limited company that provides management consulting, management and technical advice, and software development services.

B. Around June 2017, agency B (hereinafter “B”) promoted a work process, which introduced new technology, such as big data, to improve the work process and ensure the quality of data in a work system, in order to cope with the transformation of the paradigm of the electric utility industry and the leading response to the fourth industrial revolution era.

C. On August 8, 2018, the Defendant ordered the C/C service contract with the Plaintiff, D, E, and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) in relation to the above implementation project, and entered into a service contract with the members of the joint supply and demand organization (hereinafter “F”) composed of the Plaintiff, D, E, E, and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) as follows:

(hereinafter “instant contract”. The title of the instant contract: 10,848,50,000 won: The delivery period of KRW 10,848,50,000: 0.250% of the liquidated damages for delay on August 8, 2019: G contract entity and ownership ratio: Representative Company: 43.5% of the 43.5% class members E 12.5% class members per 12.5% class members per representative company

D. On April 5, 2019, the instant contracting body terminated the instant contract on June 12, 2019.

E. On September 6, 2019, based on Article 27(1)8 of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter “State Contract Act”), Article 76(1)2(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 30078, Sept. 17, 2019; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 76(1)2(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the State Contracts Act, and Article 76 [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Rule of the State Contracts Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 751, Sept. 17, 2019), the Defendant issued a disposition to restrict the Plaintiff’s qualification to participate in bidding for three months by reducing one half from six months of the period of sanctions under

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). (No dispute exists with the ground for recognition, and evidence A Nos. 1, 2, 11.