1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the instant case, is as follows, is either dismissed or added to some of the reasons for the judgment, and the following is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding a new judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion that was raised by this court in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, 2 pages 6-12 of the judgment of the court of first instance, 6-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, is as follows.

B. A partnership (hereinafter “instant partnership”)

) The Plaintiff is a non-profit organization consisting of 47 small and medium enterprises that produce concrete products, such as telegraph poles, fume pipes, and PHC files. Among them, the members producing PHC files are 17 companies, including the Plaintiff (Plaintiffs, C, E, F, G, H Co., Ltd., H Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., International Limited Liability Company, J, K Co., Ltd., Ltd., L Co., Ltd., Ltd., L Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., A, N Co., Ltd., P, P, Q, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., P., Ltd., and individual companies are identified as “stock company”

3) As to the Plaintiff’s 63 bid awarded by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 24,081,342,845 won in total, in accordance with the principle that the share of each joint supply and demand supplier is allocated to the Plaintiff according to the share of each joint supply and demand supplier in the bid awarded by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s 63 bid price is 10,248,120,810 won in total.

The following contents shall be added to 3 pages 17 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

e. However, the Defendant is a party to the contract where the Plaintiff was awarded a bid for the 63 bidding bid by the instant collaborative act, which had the authority to dispose of to the Defendant among the instant dispositions, and the contract where the local government was amended by Act No. 12000 on August 6, 2013 (hereinafter “the contract”).