1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs are responsible for total costs of the lawsuit after the filing of the appeal.

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 30, 2008, the Minister of Education, Science and Technology publicly announced that the examination of the examination of the examination books developed under Article 2007-79 ( February 28, 2007), which was conducted by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology under Article 2008-14 of the Public Notice of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in 2007, should be conducted as follows (hereinafter “public announcement of the examination of this case”).

1. Subjects of authorization: Class 19 of Class 2 high school textbook of 52 books: 10 “109-10” for the year of scientific research in the year of application of the year of authorization for the year of development of the year of authorization for the names of essential curriculum and the year of authorization for the names of curriculum among the general basic curriculum or specialized curriculum;

3. The period of application and the period of application for examination of places: From November 2, 2009 to November 6 (gold).

8. The term of validity of the authorization for the curriculum books subject to the examination of relics shall be five years from the school year in which the relevant curriculum books are first used;

(b) The term of validity of the textbook that has passed the additional authorization shall be the remaining term of validity of the curriculum books for the same subject; and in addition, when any cause for reorganization, such as full-scale or partial revision of the curriculum, such term of validity,

(b) spring.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs produced test copies of high school scientific textbooks for the examination of authorization in 2010.

C. After the public announcement of the instant authorization, the structure of the curriculum books for elementary and secondary schools, including the first-year curriculum of high school, was reorganized with the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology’s announcement No. 2010-1 (hereinafter “instant announcement”), and the method of adopting the curriculum books for high school was changed from the national policy and authorization system to the recognition system.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserted that they prepared an application for authorization of a high school science textbook with each development cost stated in the purport of the claim until October 31, 2009 according to the publication of this case by the Minister of Education, Science and Technology, which announced the high school science textbook as the textbook subject to authorization.

However, the Defendant changed his own policies on January 11, 2010.