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

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment’s reasoning, the following circumstances are revealed.

Plaintiff

On March 20, 2015, A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) entered into a working design service contract (service charge of KRW 59,376,400) with the Defendant, a contracting authority, and “C Corporation” (hereinafter “instant construction”) and submitted the working design drawings to the Defendant around July 2015.

(hereinafter “instant design service”). (b)

Plaintiff

The specifications submitted by the company do not contain any indication concerning the materials of the “debris installation (including the mold)”, and in the unit price comparison sheet, the statement is written “32,00 won per synthetic timber m (water price data 132)”; the first statement is written “861,197 won for the total material cost of the rebris installation (including the mold)” including the material cost of 832,000 won applying the “26 synthetic timber volume and unit price 32,000 won”; the statement by type of work is written “37,892,668 won”; and the “4090 Subbris”. The statement by type of work is written by applying “44 volume of the rebris installation (including the mold)” and “37,892,668 won” in the design drawings.

(hereinafter referred to as “the inconsistency with the design documents of this case”)

E Co., Ltd. which received a successful bid from the Defendant for the instant construction work completed the construction work by selecting a embankment.

Busan Metropolitan City conducted a large construction work audit in December 17, 2016, and demanded the defendant to take measures for damages and administrative measures against the plaintiffs who calculated an excessive construction cost from the design service of this case.

Accordingly, on March 27, 2017, the Defendant: (a) Article 53(1) of the Construction Technology Promotion Act; (b) Article 87(5) [Attachment 8] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Construction Technology Promotion Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29918, Jun. 25, 2019; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree”); and (c) Article 87(5) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Construction Technology Promotion Act

5. Standards for the measurement of penalty points;

(c) Ground for giving marks to construction technology service business entities and construction engineers, etc. which fall under subparagraph 3.6 of this Article.