1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 24, 2014, Korea publicly announced a bid for D Project “D Project” (hereinafter “instant bid”) as Seoul Local Government Procurement Service’s internal notice C.

B. The instant bid is subject to Article 43 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (hereinafter “State Contract Act”) and Article 43 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State Is a Party (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 216, Jan. 1, 2015) and a bid for which a successful bidder is determined by negotiations. The instant bid is a bid for which a successful bidder is determined by the negotiation, taking into account the technical evaluation (90 points) and price evaluation (10 points) of the tender participants, and is

On the other hand, the part related to this case among the written request for proposal prepared by the Republic of Korea with respect to this case is stated in attached Form.

C. E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”);

Defendant, F. F. F. 'F.'

the joint contractors of this case shall be referred to as the "joint contractors of this case" whose representative is E.

A and participated in the instant tender.

In addition, G Co., Ltd.(hereinafter referred to as "G").

(D) In addition, as a result of the opening of bids implemented on January 9, 2015, the instant joint contractor was selected as a priority bidder (i.e., the bid price’s 10 technical evaluation score) and G 93.585 points (i.e., the bid price’s 9.786 technical evaluation score) and G 93.585 points (i.e., the bid price’s 9.786 technical evaluation score).

E. On January 30, 2015, the instant joint contractor is the contractor E, and the contractor is E, the Defendant, and F, and the contractor is the contractor, and on January 30, 2015, the Republic of Korea and the project subject to the instant tender are “the instant joint contractor.”

AB concluded the agreement.

F. On February 2, 2015, the Plaintiff drafted a standard subcontract agreement with the Defendant for software business with the following content:

hereinafter referred to as the "instant subcontract"

(1) Specialized agencies;

1. A project owner: A contract for prime contract with a H institution: D project;

2. Subcontracts.