1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On January 3, 2013, Kimpo-si requested the Seoul Metropolitan Government Procurement Service (hereinafter referred to as the “Government Procurement Service”) under the Defendant to place an order for the manufacture and supply of 2 large waste crushing facilities.

The Public Procurement Service selected the Plaintiff as a successful bidder on February 15, 2013 following the tendering procedure. On March 25, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the manufacture and supply of a small-scale waste crushing facility with the Public Procurement Service on March 25, 2013 pursuant to the Act on Contracts to Which a Local Government Is a Party.

(hereinafter “instant contract” and the foregoing waste crushing equipment is “instant scraper.” At the time of the public announcement of tender, the statement attached to the National Comprehensive Electronic Procurement System (SPARE PAS) refers to “SPARE PAS spare parts.” In this case, 76 SP-101 blades, 76 p.m., 2/bending one part. The first part necessary for the main body of the instant crushing is 38 knife, 38 p.m., 2 showf., and bending one. The attached specifications contain no indication “SP-101 knife, 76 p.m., and 2/bending one part” in the main facilities.

On April 2013, the Plaintiff submitted a calculation sheet that is excluded from SPAREPAS on the basis of the contract price of 308,595,980 won and submitted it at Kimpo-si.

When controversy arises as to whether the scope of the contract includes SPARE PATS in the course of consultation between Kimpo-si and the Plaintiff, on May 10, 2013, the Public Procurement Service responded to the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) on May 10, 2013, that “if the details of the specifications and specifications are different, it shall be supplied with specifications; and (b) the basic amount of the instant bid was calculated based on the price included in the specifications.” (c) On May 22, 2013, the Defendant responded to the same purport that SPARE PATS is included in the PARETS.

The plaintiff on June 12, 2013 is SPARE.