1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor is the Plaintiff’s Intervenor.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 13, 2016, the Defendant recruited a developer for a development project on “D complex development project” of 23,670.6 square meters of the Seoul Young-gu, Busan Metropolitan City commercial area E (hereinafter “D complex development project”) and attached a public offering guide containing specific matters concerning qualification requirements for application and the details of the project (hereinafter “instant public offering and public offering guide”).

B. On July 22, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a business plan to the Defendant on the F Consium, C Consium, and G Consium, respectively.

C. The Defendant’s Selection Deliberation Committee assessed each of the above business plans on July 28, 2016, and the Defendant, based on the results of the project plan assessment on the same day, publicly announced the selection of a priority bidder to select a C consortium (hereinafter “instant designated bidder”). D.

On October 12, 2016, the Defendant concluded the instant business agreement with each of the instant designated parties.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 8 through 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The instant priority negotiation subject’s selection, which is not a “disposition,” which is the subject of an appeal litigation, is aimed at entering into a private contract with the Defendant as a private economic entity, and thus does not fall under a disposition subject to an appeal litigation. 2) Even if an administrative disposition is unlawful, if it is impossible to recover the non-existence of interest in a lawsuit, there is no interest in a lawsuit seeking revocation of such administrative disposition. However, even if the selection of a priority negotiation subject is revoked, the Plaintiff is not the next priority bidder, and thus, cannot be selected as a priority negotiation subject or a project agreement

Therefore, the Plaintiff has no legal interest in seeking revocation of the selection of the priority negotiation subject of the instant case.

B. Determination as to the assertion of disposition 1.