1. Of the part concerning Defendant D Construction Promotion Committee of the first instance judgment, the following amount is ordered to be paid.

1. The reasons why the court of the first instance should explain are as follows. Thus, the reasoning of the court of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment, except for the following cases, and it is citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

The fourth and seventh parallel of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as "G") shall be the "stock company G" as "G".

The 6th to 5th of the first instance judgment are as follows.

4) Meanwhile, the instant joint contractors are responsible for the joint implementation method with the investment ratio of Plaintiff A and Plaintiff B at 52% and 48%, respectively, and the Specialized Fire-Fighting System Corporation decided to take charge of G as a shared implementation method.

[Attachment I (hereinafter “Appraiser”) in the first instance court’s 6th 7th 7th e.g., “Expert I (hereinafter “Experts”)” in the first instance court’s 6th e.g., “Plaintiffs” in the first instance court’s 6th e.g., “Plaintiffs” and “Plaintiffs” in the 4th e.g., “Plaintiffs” in the same e., e., the first instance court’s 9th e.g., “Public Procurement Act” in the 9th e., the 9th e., the first instance court’s e., “Defendant D Construction Promotion Committee” in the 9th e.g., “Defendant Committee,” and “Defendant D Construction Promotion Committee” in the 9th e.g., 1 to 10th e., “Defendant Committee” in the 10th e., the first instance court’s e., e., 192 first e., 17”).

[2] On the other hand, according to the statements in health classes, Eul-7 through 20, Eul-21-1 through 7, Eul-22-1 through 23-7, Eul-25, and Eul-26 with respect to the amount of money which the defendant committee has already paid to or must be deducted from the price to be paid to the plaintiffs, the defendant committee against the plaintiffs and the subcontractor from May 16, 2013 to February 5, 2016.