A. On September 5, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on the “court rulings (excluding personal information) against the Defendant among civil and administrative litigations filed by the public against the Defendant from January 1, 2010 to the present day.”

B. On September 9, 2013, the Defendant did not retain the judgment of a civil case, and the written judgment of an administrative case is referred to as the “Information Disclosure Act” on the grounds that the disclosure of matters concerning national security, national defense, unification, diplomatic relations, etc. may seriously undermine the State’s interest or significantly undermine the protection of the lives, bodies, and property of the people.

) A disposition rejecting the disclosure of information under Article 9(1)2 and 3 was made. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. In full view of the above facts as to whether the request for revocation of a disposition rejecting information disclosure concerning the judgment of a civil case (excluding personal information) among the instant lawsuit was lawful, and the evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings, the Defendant appears not to have kept and managed the judgment of a civil case among the information the Plaintiff requested to disclose, and there is no other evidence to prove that there is considerable probability that the

Therefore, among the lawsuit of this case, the part concerning the claim for cancellation of a disposition rejecting information disclosure concerning the judgment of civil cases (excluding personal information) is unlawful as there is no legal interest

3. Whether a disposition rejecting information disclosure is legitimate with respect to the rulings on administrative cases (excluding personal information);

A. The judgment of the administrative case (excluding personal information) indicated in the attached list, for which the Plaintiff claimed disclosure (hereinafter “information of this case”) does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)2 and 3 of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, the Defendant’s information of this case.