On October 28, 2015, the Defendant rendered a partial decision to disclose information to the Plaintiff on the ground that it falls under Article 9(1)2, 3, and 6 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition,” and the information listed in the separate sheet that was not disclosed to the public in the instant disposition is “each of the instant information”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The citizen’s right to know of the necessity of information disclosure is the right directly guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, and the Information Disclosure Act enacted for the specific realization thereof declares the principle of information disclosure in Article 3.

In light of the purpose and purpose of the Information Disclosure Act in order to guarantee citizens' right to know and secure citizens' participation in state affairs and transparency in state administration, it is necessary to strictly interpret whether the information disclosure constitutes a reason for non-disclosure under each subparagraph of Article 9(1) of the Information Disclosure Act.

B. Article 9(1)2 of the Information Disclosure Act provides, “Information pertaining to national security, national defense, unification, diplomatic relations, etc., which, if disclosed, may seriously undermine the national interest.” Article 9(1)4 of the Information Disclosure Act provides, “Information pertaining to ongoing trials and criminal investigation, institution and maintenance of public prosecution, execution and correction of punishment, and security disposition, which, if disclosed, would significantly impede the performance of duties or infringe on the criminal defendant’s right to fair trial.”

this Court.