1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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

Basic Facts

On January 30, 2015, in order to select art works to be installed in the inside and outside spaces of the building in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, Yeonsu-gu E, Incheon, the Defendant conducted a public offering for the production and installation of the E art works (hereinafter “instant public offering”), and published the guidelines for the instant public offering (hereinafter “the guidelines”).

On February 5, 2015, the Defendant held the site site conference on the instant solicitation, and the Plaintiff A participated in the said site site conference through the mandatary G and submitted the application for the bid.

After that, the Plaintiffs constituted a consortium with Plaintiff A as the representative author, and received the works of Plaintiff A’s “H”, Plaintiff B’s “I”, and Plaintiff C’s “J” in the instant public offering.

On April 13, 2015, the defendant selected the plaintiffs as priority negotiation partners after review by a review committee comprised of external experts and publicly announced them.

After that, K and three other parties, etc., who participated in the public invitation of this case, have raised an objection as follows with respect to the plaintiffs' works.

Plaintiff

A’H”: A’s global writers copied L’s expression methods and M’s expression methods, and the principal used in another’s works as it is.

Plaintiff

B’I”. “I” only submitted the same form or the theme as the one’s work, which was elected at the existing public contest, in the form and color of which is the same.

Plaintiff

C'J's 'W': very end of the Council may lead to serious injuries that not only adults but also children are seated and face-to-face.

Accordingly, on April 16, 2015, the Defendant requested the Plaintiffs to order the dismissal of the above objection. On April 28, 2015, the Defendant was given legal advice to the effect that the works submitted by the Plaintiffs were in violation of the guidelines for the public offering of this case, and thus, the designation of the preferred bidder may be revoked.

The defendant shall examine whether the plaintiffs' works violate the guidelines for public offering of this case.