2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On January 10, 2007, the Plaintiff was convicted of nine years of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of heavy confinement, etc. at the Daejeon District Court, and was acquitted of murder among the facts charged.

[2] On November 23, 2007, the judgment of the court of first instance was reversed and the judgment of the court of Daejeon was sentenced to imprisonment for life against the plaintiff. The plaintiff and the prosecutor appealeded against this. On November 23, 2007, the Daejeon High Court reversed the judgment and sentenced the plaintiff to imprisonment for life.

(207No53) The Plaintiff appealed on March 13, 2008, and the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court below and remanded the case to the Daejeon High Court on the ground that it was unlawful to find the Defendant guilty of murder among the facts charged on March 13, 208.

(207Do10754). In the reversed and remanded trial, the Daejeon High Court rendered a judgment dismissing all the appeals of the plaintiff and the prosecutor on July 17, 2008 (2008No146), and on October 9, 2008, rendered a judgment dismissing all the appeals of the plaintiff and the prosecutor on October 9, 2008 (2008Do6891), and the judgment of the court of first instance, which sentenced the plaintiff to nine years of imprisonment, became final and conclusive.

(hereinafter referred to as “related criminal case”). (b)

On September 19, 2011, pursuant to Article 10(1) of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”), the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to disclose to the public each protocol of examination of witness I and B (hereinafter “information of disclosure of this case”) among the evidence records of the 2006Dahap234 case, ① a record (50 pages of evidence list), a criminal investigation report (167 pages of evidence list), B’s statement (194 pages of evidence list), a photograph (4 pages of evidence list), a photograph (454 pages of evidence list), and C’s witness, D, E, F, G, and H in the public trial records of this case, and ② a witness I and B in the public trial records of this case (hereinafter “information of disclosure of this case”).

(hereinafter “instant request for information disclosure”). C.

On September 30, 2011, the defendant issued a disposition against the plaintiff to the effect that "it shall make a non-disclosure decision in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Act and the Information Disclosure Act."

(hereinafter referred to as "the Disposition in this case"). [Grounds for recognition] did not dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2.