1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Acknowledgement of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the entry of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following deletions or replacements and additions, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The number of pages 12 through 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deleted, and the number of pages 18 and 4 (the number of pages shall be excluded; the same shall apply hereinafter) shall be deleted, respectively.

From 16th to 13th of the judgment of the first instance court, the "40th of the 5th of the 20th of the 16th of the 16th of the 13th of the 16th of the 13th of the 20th of the 5th of the

On the other hand, on October 28, 2019, the Korea Student Aid Foundation issued a certificate of performance of general service performance, including the content of J director, to the request for issuance of the plaintiff's certificate of performance. On October 28, 2019, the Korea Student Aid Foundation was engaged in additional and secondary consulting services other than the basic task of the plaintiff's M Services.

"The first instance court's judgment Nos. 7 through 22, 3 was followed as follows. (1) The certificate of performance of general services issued by the Korea Student Aid Foundation to the Plaintiff on October 28, 2019 stated that the Plaintiff provided consulting services not only for basic tasks but also for additional tasks. Although the Korea Student Aid Foundation responded to the purport that there was no electronic bid or private contract for consultation with the President of the Korea Education Research Information Institute on September 25, 2017, it was conducted as an additional business of M services, the consultation Nos. 1 and 2 was not concluded. Accordingly, according to the attached Form No. 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the Korea Student Aid Foundation Act, it appears that the Plaintiff participated in the 1 and 2 consulting service, even if the Korea Student Aid Foundation did not enter into an electronic bid or private contract for consultation with the President of the Korea Education Research Information Institute on September 25, 2017.

Law No. 22 of the judgment of the first instance is followed.