1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Of the instant lawsuits, it is against the Commissioner of the Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 17, 2008, the Plaintiff is a consortium that was established by the non-party Syms Co., Ltd., the non-party Syms Co., Ltd., the non-party Syms Co., Ltd., and the non-party Symms Co., Ltd. for the operation of the hymbal by proxy.

B. On October 23, 2007, the head of Sinpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office (the head of Sinpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office changed to Sinpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office on February 29, 2008) (the head of Sinpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office changed to Sinpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office), which is the managing authority of Sinpo Port 64 m (hereinafter referred to as the “instant wharf”) made a public announcement of the plan for the selection of the operating company of the instant wharf (Article 2007-97; hereinafter referred to as the “instant public announcement”). The following penalty provisions (hereinafter referred to as the “instant penalty provision”).

V. Matters to be performed by the selected operator (affirmative)

5. The following penalty shall be imposed when the business plan is not implemented:

(a) Standards for calculation of penalty where the amount of annual inducement plan presented at the time of project participation falls short of the amount of annual inducement plan: The penalty to be paid each year = Rent for the relevant year ¡¿ (production to be submitted - actual disposal

(b)The standards for calculating penalty where the selected operator fails to comply with a plan for facilities, equipment, etc. on the project plan: The penalty to be applied for three years from the date of commencement of operation = rents for the relevant year ¡¿ (unscheduled number/Planning number) ¡¿ (number of days of non-performance/planed number) (number of months of non-performance/12)]: Provided, That the penalty shall be paid more than 80% compared to the quantity presented in the plan, and if there is any special reason for non-performance, such as failure

C. According to the instant public notice, the Plaintiff submitted the “harbor facility investment plan and the “new cargo inducement plan” (hereinafter “instant business plan”) to the head of the competent regional maritime port office on September 30, 201, and was selected as the operating company of the instant wharf through a competitive bidding. Defendant on May 9, 2008.