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 cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the part added or added below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

At the bottom of 3 of the first instance judgment, the following shall be added to three:

E. However, for the first time, the Defendant: (a) stated that the instant disposition was a tender that was issued with the authority to dispose of to the Defendant; (b) stated that the public notice institution was a bid that is not the Defendant; and (c) that the Act on Contracts to Which a Local Government is a Party (amended by Act No. 12000, Aug. 6, 2013; hereinafter “Revised Local Contract Act”) was a tender that was enforced on February 7, 2014; and (d) stated 112 cases (the Defendant’s disposition authority), such as the 112 cases (the total successful bid amount of KRW 31,260,011,054) as indicated in the attached Form, except for the bid that the end-user institution is a local government

The following shall be added to the fourth two pages of the judgment of the first instance, and the fourth three parallels (1) shall be 2) and the bottom of three parallels (2) shall be 3) respectively:

1) In the case of a contract ordered by the State, there is no ground to view that the defendant does not fall under the head of the central government agency under the Government Organization Act, and that the head of the central government agency delegated the disposal authority to the defendant. ② In the case of a contract ordered by a local government, the defendant is not the head of the local government, and there is no ground to deem that the head of the local government delegated the disposal authority to the defendant. ③ In the case of a contract ordered by a public agency, the defendant is not the head of the public agency, and there is no ground to deem that the head of the public agency entrusted the disposal authority to the defendant. The 5th 11st 1st th th 10 judgment of the first instance court is the "Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Small and Medium Enterprises Products and the Promotion of Development of Market Markets"