1. All appeals filed by plaintiffs A and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The plaintiff A and the defendant among the costs of appeal.

The court's explanation of this case by the court of the first instance as to this case is to revise and add part of the judgment of the first instance as referred to in paragraph (2), and it is identical to the reasoning of the first instance judgment in addition to adding a decision as to the matters asserted by the plaintiff company in the trial as referred to in paragraph (3). Thus, it is to refer this to Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article

The amendment shall be amended as follows, from 2 pages 10 to 12 of the first instance judgment.

A. A. The Plaintiff Company, a company engaged in building and civil engineering work, etc., receives a supply and demand jointly with a new public corporation for building and civil engineering work ordered by the Defendant, and receives and executes five sections from among the “E development project”, and C is a managing director of the Plaintiff Company’s civil engineering part, a general director of the domestic and foreign civil engineering project, and D is a defendant’s auditor. In the first instance judgment, the following is added to the following.

(10) Even if the following circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff, namely, the transfer of the site of a military unit, that the matters asked by the Plaintiff Company C to D for the proper implementation of the said construction, and the fact that K was placed at the situation where the construction would be delayed due to the failure to perform appropriate performance of the construction works despite having been subcontracted by the request by D upon the request of D in the course of the construction of the E-development project, is recognized that there is no causal relationship with the instant misconduct, it would be obvious that the instant misconduct would be prejudicial to the appropriate implementation of fair competition or contract stipulated in Article 39(2) of the Public Institutions Act in order to restrict the participation of unjust enterprisers in the construction of the G site, and that the occurrence of the outcome is not necessarily required, taking into account the various circumstances recognized earlier, the instant misconduct in question would be subject to sanctions prescribed in Article 39(2) of the Public Institutions Act.