The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court, based on its reasoning, found that the Defendant, on December 31, 2014, had a false record in the Korea Electrical Construction Association’s electrical construction performance confirmation source (hereinafter “this case’s electrical construction performance confirmation source”) submitted by the Plaintiff during the tendering procedure, that “the document submitted was proved to have been fraudulently or falsely prepared” under Article 11(1) of the Criteria for Qualification Examination (hereinafter “the Criteria for Qualification Examination”) regarding the Defendant’s tendering procedure for the Electric Power Distribution Corporation Cooperation Company (hereinafter “instant tendering procedure”) in 2015, “the document submitted was proved to have been fraudulently or falsely prepared”), refers to the case where there is a false part of the document submitted irrespective of whether the bidder’s intention or negligence, and on the ground that the Plaintiff had a false record in the Korea Electrical Construction Association’s electrical construction performance confirmation source (hereinafter “this case’s construction performance confirmation source”) that submitted to the Plaintiff on December 31, 2014.

The lower court determined that: (a) it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s Intervenor’s selection of prospective bidders and the determination of successful bidders, and the conclusion of the contract on January 20, 2015 between the Defendant and the Defendant’s Intervenor, which was based on the instant notice of cancellation, contravenes good morals and other social order; and (b) the instant notice of cancellation is deemed null and void.

2. However, the above determination by the court below is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

The judgment below

The following circumstances revealed by the reasoning and records, namely, the total amount of construction records for the five years from the year 2009 to the year 2013 calculated by properly reflecting the results of the instant construction records, among the confirmation sources of construction records of this case submitted by the Plaintiff, shall be 10.0 won, which is the portion of the construction records falsely reported to be 9,211,552,00 won.