1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) is a company established for the purpose of architectural design and construction supervision, etc., and the Plaintiff Company B, as an internal director of the Plaintiff Company, was a responsible director at the time of performing the design service for new construction of the C police station.

B. On December 20, 2012, the Defendant ordered “construction of the C police station’s office building (hereinafter “instant construction”)” through the Public Procurement Service, and concluded a design service contract for the instant construction project with the Plaintiff Company in KRW 475,00,000 between the Plaintiff Company and the Plaintiff Company.

(E) On May 21, 2013, adding the geothermal design cost to the design cost of KRW 493,430,000; hereinafter “instant contract”). (C)

On October 2013, the Plaintiffs supplied design documents, such as a general statement of construction cost, a quantity calculation statement, a statement of particulars, design drawings, etc., calculated by the Defendant the total construction cost of the instant construction project at KRW 16,104,794,00.

The plaintiffs divided the items of "official type" into construction, machinery, civil engineering, landscaping, electricity, telecommunications, and fire fighting, and included the construction cost in the construction cost table. Among them, construction cost was calculated as KRW 7,892,586,000.

The Defendant commenced the instant construction on March 2, 2014, confirmed that the Plaintiffs were omitted in the volume calculation sheet as a result of the examination of the quantity by the contractor and supervision team, and requested confirmation from the Plaintiffs. On April 2014, the Plaintiffs confirmed the error in calculating the volume of steel bars, etc. to be used on the beams of the ground level of the building, and considered that the construction cost, including the omitted portion, increased by KRW 403,625,103 when re-calculated the construction cost, including the omitted portion, would be KRW 16,508,419,103.

E. On April 14, 2014, the Defendant requested a review to the Public Procurement Service. On April 15, 2014, the Public Procurement Service notified the Plaintiffs of “request for review of omission of design”.

As a result of the review on the omitted portion, the Plaintiffs were to review the Public Procurement Service on or around April 17, 2014, and “refinite concrete during the instant construction.”