1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs and Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) are companies engaged in the business of filling, selling, etc. liquefied petroleum gas, and Defendant B is those engaged in the business of filling, selling, etc. liquefied petroleum gas in the trade name of “C”.

B. On March 23, 2017, the Army D unit (hereinafter “instant unit”) published a bid for a contract to supply liquefied petroleum gas (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) to each facility of the said unit (hereinafter “instant bid”). The main contents relating to the instant case are as follows.

The title of "17-year LPG purchase contract period: Until March 31, 2018 from the date of the contract: Provided, That the automatic extension method of supply under the same conditions until the time of supply by the next contractor is possible: the physical sale method and the supply facilities shall be installed and managed by the supplier at his/her own expense, but the installation cost shall be transferred to the supplier at the time of the cancellation or termination of the contract, including the gas price, and the supplier shall transfer the ownership of the recovered supply facilities to the supplier once, and the supplier shall pay the cost of the supply facilities depreciated to the former supplier in cash, and the supplier shall pay the cost of the supply facilities depreciated to the former supplier once in cash at the time of the conclusion of the supply contract of this case, and the cost of construction for replacing the supply facilities to be paid by the former supplier to the former supplier at the time of the conclusion of the supply contract of this case and the cost of construction for installing a small storage tank (hereinafter referred to as "the particulars of the construction cost of this case"): the final construction cost of this case: 5,5,953,24 won,70

C. The Plaintiffs are the joint contractors with the investment ratio of 50% in the Plaintiff East Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff East Industry”), the Plaintiff’s limited partnership company’s two raw energy, the Central Energy Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff two raw energy, and the Plaintiff Central Energy Industry”), respectively, 25% in which the representative is the Plaintiff East Industry.