A. On April 19, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased subordinated bonds issued by B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) at KRW 100 million.

B. On February 3, 2014, the Plaintiff, along with C and D, purchased subordinated bonds that the Financial Supervisory Service and the Republic of Korea beliefed to the equity capital ratio of BISD standards as notified in the B’s investment prospectus, but B went bankrupt on September 7, 2012, thereby causing damage equivalent to the purchase amount of subordinated bonds. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking damages (Seoul Central District Court 2014Gahap5727, Seoul Central District Court) on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s act of receiving bribe from the employees of the Financial Supervisory Service and neglecting inspection and supervision, and neglecting the accounting and accounting, was caused by an illegal act that was found to be a fluorous act.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for the commission of document forwarding to the Seoul Central District Court on the records of the case No. 2012-type and No. 3848 (hereinafter “the records of this case”), which are part of the final judgment records preserved in the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office, during the course of the said damages lawsuit. The said court accepted the Plaintiff’s application and entrusted document forwarding to the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office on April 18, 2014.

On June 23, 2014, the Defendant sent to the Seoul Central District Court a certified copy of the instant records that could not be sent due to the decision of the public prosecutor in charge.

E. On November 5, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on the instant records.

F. On November 7, 2014, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision with respect to the Plaintiff on the ground that each of the information contained in the instant records constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)3, 4, 6, and 7 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

G. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the foregoing non-disclosure decision, and each of the information listed in the separate sheet No. 1 of the records of the instant case (hereinafter “instant information”).