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

A. On January 6, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of the details of the marketing and use of business promotion expenses of the Embassy of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of 2013 and the details of each receipt related to cultural, public relations, consular, education, and the KOTRA’s duties (hereinafter “instant information”).

B. On January 22, 2014, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision based on Article 9(1)2, etc. of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) on the ground that “this case’s information is related to a specific matter, such as non-disclosure consultation with the Chinese government or any other major personnel, and it is likely that the disclosure would seriously prejudice the intermediate diplomatic relationship or other important national interests at the time of disclosure, and that the Plaintiff’s request for information disclosure would be highly likely to constitute abuse of the right to request information disclosure.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant information does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under each subparagraph of Article 9(1) of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, the instant disposition rejecting the disclosure of the instant information is unlawful. 2) The instant information alleged by the Defendant constitutes information subject to non-disclosure. Even if the instant information is subject to disclosure, the instant information cannot be separated from the instant information related to political, economic, military purposes, etc. from the details of the official fees and the details of the use of official business promotion expenses of the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in the Republic of Korea in 2013. The Defendant did not retain the instant information separately from the details of the use of official expenses and official business promotion expenses of the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in the Republic of Korea in 201

In addition, considering the contents and frequency of the Plaintiff’s request for disclosure of information against the Defendant, the instant request for disclosure of information.