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 by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the supplement of the following contents, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

Part 3 at the bottom of Part 6, “The Plaintiff participated in the conduct of collusion in accordance with the regional string agreement on April 1, 2014 by participating two times in the bidding conducted by the Yang-gu Gun on April 1, 2014.”

at the bottom of 12 the following shall be added to:

In the case of a two-stage competitive tendering procedure, the two-stage competitive tendering procedure is that only five or more enterprises selected by the procuring entity from among the enterprises registered in the national forum shopping, and the other enterprises are not allowed to participate in the tendering procedure. Therefore, if the Plaintiff participated in the tendering procedure and has not been awarded the bid two times during the collaborative period, it is only the result of the Plaintiff’s voluntary efforts, but it is only the incidental situation that the choice of the procuring entity is not the result of the Plaintiff’s choice. In other words, the Plaintiff’s failure to receive the bid was due to the fact that the Plaintiff was not selected as the procuring entity from the procuring entity, and the Plaintiff was not a procuring entity with the recognition of the fact that the Plaintiff was not selected as the procuring entity from the local government with the authority to participate in the tendering procedure, and it is not because the Plaintiff was passive in participating in the tendering procedure (only if the procuring entity of the region where the Plaintiff was recognized as the Plaintiff was designated as the one that can participate in the second-stage competitive tendering procedure, the Plaintiff appears to have been awarded the bid agreement

Therefore, the Defendant rendered a disposition to restrict the Plaintiff’s participation in a bid to the extent that it is identical or similar to other companies that participated in a bid much more than the Plaintiff and the bid price was awarded.

(2) The disposition is a principle of proportionality or equity.