In respect of an infrastructure project planned by the government which is evaluated by the authority in charge as suitable for private participation, the authority in charge shall announce by a public notice the programmed contents of the building and/or the operation thereof, as well as the qualifications of the participants for the infrastructure project concerned, so to invite private participation.
The applicants of the infrastructure project as referred to in the preceding Paragraph shall acquire from the authority in charge the relevant information of the programmed project before the expiration of the deadline set forth in the public notice.

To participate in an infrastructure project specified in the preceding Article, the applicants shall, before the expiration of the deadline set forth in the public notice, prepare the qualification documents, the relevant land utilization plan, the construction plan, the operation plan, the financial plan, the letter of intent for financing issued by the financial institution and other information as may be required in the public notice concerned, and then submit the same to the authority in charge to apply for participation in the infrastructure project concerned.

To evaluate the applications submitted in response to the public notice inviting private participation, the authority in charge shall organize a Selection Committee which shall establish the evaluation criteria based on the purpose of the infrastructure project concerned, examine and evaluate the materials submitted by the applicants on a fair basis and then select the best applicant therefrom within the evaluation period.
The evaluation criteria referred to in the preceding Paragraph shall be announced simultaneously upon the announcement of the public notice inviting private participation. The evaluation period shall be determined on a case-by-case basis and a notice thereof shall be given to the applicants.
The regulations governing the organization of the Selection Committee and the evaluation thereof as referred to in Paragraph 1 shall be prescribed by the competent authority. One half or more of the members of the Selection Committee shall be specialists and scholars and the evaluation process shall be made public.

The applicant which is selected as the best applicant in accordance with the preceding article shall complete negotiations for the contract and the preparatory work, and sign the contract within the time limits given by the authority in charge, and construct the project and operate the infrastructure in accordance with the law.
If the best applicant fails to complete negotiations for the contract, the preparatory work, and/or signing of the contract within the given time limits, the authority in charge may demand that the best applicant complete the above matters within a given time limit. If the best applicant still fails to do as demanded, the authority in charge may replace the best applicant with the second-best applicant who is also qualified for constructing the infrastructure, or announce again by a public notice to re-invite private participation in accordance with Article 42 hereof.
Before the execution of the contract, if, out of consideration for policy change or public interests, the authority in charge does not want to proceed with the negotiation for or the execution of the contract, the authority in charge shall notify the best applicant thereof in writing and negotiate the compensation amount with the best applicant. The scope of compensation may cover the reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the best applicant for preparation for the application and in reliance on the selection results.
If the negotiation for a compensation amount under the preceding paragraph fails to reach an agreement, a lawsuit may be initiated before the administrative court to claim payment.

Where a private institution takes the initiative to apply for participating in an infrastructure project, the land and facilities needed to support the application may be provided by the applicant itself or be provided by the authority in charge.
For handling a case under the preceding paragraph, the authority in charge shall make a policy announcement according to its policy requirements or in reference to the project outlines submitted by private institutions so as to invite private institutions to apply for participating in the infrastructure project by submitting feasibility assessment reports. Where a private institution’s project outline is considered by the authority in charge as not meeting the policy requirements, the private institution’s application shall be dismissed.
After a feasibility assessment report submitted in accordance with the preceding paragraph passes the preliminary review of the authority in charge, the authority in charge shall organize a Selection Committee in accordance with Paragraph 1, Article 44 to conduct the following matters:
1. Where a private institution applicant provides private the land and facilities needed by the project, the authority in charge shall notify the applicant passing the preliminary review to submit its investment plan for review by the Selection Committee.
2. Where the authority in charge provides the land and facilities needed by the project, the authority in charge shall make an announcement according to the results of the preliminary review to invite applicants and tell the private institution applicants having passed the preliminary review to submit their investment plans for review by the Selection Committee. Preferential terms may be offered to applicants having passed the preliminary review.
The best applicant as selected according to the review procedure under the preceding paragraph shall complete contract negotiations and all the preparatory work, acquire the ownership of, or the right to use, the needed land according to the investment plan approved by the authority in charge, and sign a concession agreement with the authority in charge within the time limits given by the authority in charge, before proceeding to construct and operate the infrastructure in accordance with the law.
Where none of the applicants under Subparagraph 2, Paragraph 3 pass the review, are able to complete the preparatory work within the given time limit, or are able to sign a concession agreement with the authority in charge, the authority may, out of consideration for public interest, publish an announcement of the investment plan in accordance with the applicable laws to invite private investment in the plan in accordance with Article 42, or let the government construct and/or operate the infrastructure on its own.
The regulations governing the application documentation, the application and review procedures, the review guidelines, the time limit for review, the preferential terms offered to applicants passing the preliminary review, and the related matters under Paragraphs 2 to 4 shall be prescribed by the competent authority.
Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the preceding Article shall apply mutatis mutandis to matters set forth in this article.

If an applicant participating in an infrastructure project believes that any of the authority in charge’s acts or decisions in the application and evaluation procedures is in violation of this Act or any applicable laws or regulations, which damages the applicant’s rights or interests, the applicant may file a written protest with the authority in charge before the following deadline:
1. A protest against the regulations for the announcement of the bidding documents for inviting private participation may be made from the day after the announcement to up to two thirds of the days within the application period; if the two-thirds limit cuts short the final day, then the final day is deemed as a whole day. Nevertheless, the entire time limit for such protest shall not be shorter than 10 days.
2. A protest against the application and evaluation procedures, decisions or results may be made within 30 days after the date of receipt of the authority in charge’s notice or the announcement. Where there is no notice or announcement of the procedures, decisions or results, a protest may be made within 30 days of the day the procedures, decisions or results are or can be known.
3. A protest against a decision made after the evaluation results or before the execution of a concession agreement may be made within 30 days after the date of receipt of the authority in charge’s notice or the announcement.
The authority in charge shall properly handle a protest and notify the protester of the handling results within 20 days after the date of receipt of the protest. Where the handling results involve amending or supplementing the announcement of the bidding documents for inviting private participation, a new announcement shall be made, and the deadline for application may be extended, if necessary.
Where a protester disagrees with the results of handling its protest, or the authority in charge fails to handle its protest before the abovesaid deadline, the protester may, within 30 days after the day of receipt of the handling results of its protest or the day after the expiration of the handling time limit, lodge a written complaint with the complaint review board organized by the competent authority for cases concerning promotion of private participation in infrastructure projects. The competent authority may collect review charges, appraisal costs and other necessary fees from the complainant.
The regulations for making protests or complaints, the procedures for handling and reviewing disputes, the items of and the criteria for collected charges, the payment methods, and other matters set forth in the preceding three paragraphs shall be prescribed by the competent authority.

With regard to the infrastructure projects which are built or operated by private institutions as approved under this Act, the provisions under the Government Procurement Act shall not apply. Participation by a foreign company in an infrastructure project governed by this Act shall comply with the treaties or agreements to which this nation is a party.

The concession agreement shall set forth the formation of a coordination committee for contract dispute coordination, and may stipulate that disputes shall be submitted to arbitration if the coordination fails.
Unless otherwise provided in the concession agreement, disputes over contract performance may be submitted to coordination by the coordination committee, or application may be filed to request mediation of disputes over contract performance by a contract performance dispute mediation committee organized by the competent authority. Where an application for mediation is filed by the private institution, the authority in charge shall not reject such mediation. If the coordination or the mediation fails, the parties may agree to submit the dispute to arbitration.
Unless otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions for mediation in the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the procedure for and the effects of the contract performance dispute mediation committee’s handling disputes over contract performance.
The contract performance dispute mediation committee shall have nine to thirty-five members, who shall be appointed from high-ranking officers of the competent authority or be impartial people having expertise in engineering, finance, or law. Of the members, three at the most may be appointed from high-ranking officers of the competent authority, and such members shall not exceed one-fifth of the total members. The criteria for the organization of the contract performance dispute mediation committee, the term of office and the selection of the members, and other related matters shall be prescribed by the competent authority.
Mediation fee, appraisal costs, and other necessary fees shall be payable for application for mediation of disputes over contract performance. The items of collected fees, the collection criteria, the payment method, and the rules for sharing the fees and costs, and other relevant matters shall be prescribed by the competent authority.

Mediation of a dispute over contract performance shall be deemed successful if the parties agree on the mediation results. If the parties disagree with the results, the mediation shall be deemed unsuccessful.
During the mediation, a mediation committee member may ex officio present a written mediation suggestion in the name of the contract performance dispute mediation committee.
Either party who disagrees with the mediation suggestion mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall present its disagreement in writing to the committee and the opposite party within 20 days after the service of the mediation suggestion. Any party failing to express its disagreement in writing within the time limit shall be deemed consenting to the suggestion.
The rules for application for mediation of disputes over contract performance, the application procedures, and other related matters shall be prescribed by the competent authority.