1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The contents to be stated in this part of the basic facts are identical to those of the judgment of the court of first instance on the premise of “1.” Thus, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s act of restricting the use of the instant system, the Plaintiff asserted as follows. The Plaintiff first asserted as to the Plaintiff’s act of restricting the use of the instant system. The Plaintiff started to operate and assist in the Plaintiff’s representative director Eul’s act of restricting the use of the instant system. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate that was previously used in the Plaintiff transferred to E is also transferred to D, and the Plaintiff temporarily used the same AP (IP) in the course of adding the work method to E. The Plaintiff did not temporarily use the same AP (IP) and the authorized certificate. As the Defendant’s assertion, the Plaintiff did not participate in the bid through the instant system using the same AP (IP) and the authorized certificate. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s reason for restricting the use of the instant system is different from the facts that the Plaintiff participated in the bid through the instant system, including evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, 14, 15, 14, 15, 14, 1, and 37.

A) Examining the main parts of the instant system usage terms and conditions prepared by the Defendant and agreed to by the Plaintiff, as follows. The Exchange under Article 3 (Principle of Electronic Processing) operates a system that enables electronic processing of procurement affairs pursuant to Article 4 of the Electronic Government Act, and the Members shall use electronic processing means provided by the system. Article 5 (User Registration)