For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court reversed the first instance judgment that found the Defendants guilty on the grounds that there was no proof of crime as to the facts charged of this case, and sentenced the Defendants not guilty.

In light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “competitive bidding” as stipulated in Articles 84-3 subparag. 5 and 14(2) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.