All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. According to the reasoning of the evidence No. 7 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the Intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) recommended by F political party in the 20th National Assembly members of the Incheon Metropolitan City E-election (hereinafter referred to as the “instant election”) implemented on April 13, 2016, recommended by the F Party in the 20th National Assembly members of the Incheon Metropolitan City E-election (hereinafter referred to as the “instant election”) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant election”), the 42,271 votes, the 42,245 votes recommended by Plaintiff A Party B, the H candidate recommended by G political party, and the 6,024 votes, respectively, decided as the elected party.

2. On the assertion that the election is invalidated due to the publication of false facts

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion (1) H candidates recommended by G political parties agreed on the unification of candidates by G political parties and J political parties for the purpose of election, but they did not work as candidates by the Plaintiff Party A, which is another main camping party, and thus, they did not constitute "opportune candidates" in election campaign materials, such as campaign posters, election campaign bulletins, and placards, or announcement of false facts prohibited under Article 250(1) of the Public Official Election Act by stating the expression "opportun candidates" in election campaign materials, such as campaign posters, election campaign bulletins, and placards, or making the expression "opportun candidates" in the election campaign process.

(2) After stating that H candidate’s election campaign material “Pparty candidate” was an election campaign material, the expression “G Party J party candidate” was additionally inserted.

Even if an additionally stated expression is limited to the size and degree of the word “the front right candidate” in the expression “the front right candidate,” and as a whole, the expression should be deemed as having expressed “the front right candidate” in light of its color different, and even if an additionally stated expression should be combined.

Even if there was no agreement between the plaintiff A political party and the single candidate, it constitutes the publication of false facts, since there was no candidate to simplify the election district of this case since there was no candidate to recommend the Jparty in the election district of this case.

(3) The C election commission (hereinafter referred to as the “C election commission”) has posted it.