정보공개거부처분취소
1. Of the instant suit, the part of the claim for the revocation of the disclosure refusal disposition regarding the information listed in Annex 1 List 3 shall be dismissed.
1. Details and details of the disposition;
A. On May 10, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on the “information listed in [Attachment 1] List 1 and Paragraph (2)” and “a copy of the written contract submitted by the Plaintiff.” On May 16, 2013, the Defendant disclosed only the “a copy of the written contract submitted by the Plaintiff” to the Plaintiff, and the remainder of the information constitutes Article 9(1)4 and 6 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).
On May 27, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an objection, and the Defendant dismissed the objection on June 4, 2013.
B. On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the inspection and copying of the “information specified in attached Table 1” (hereinafter “instant information”).
On July 18, 2014, the Defendant permitted the Plaintiff to peruse “information specified in attached Table 1 List 4” and refused to copy.
On July 25, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul High Public Prosecutor's Administrative Appeals Commission. On May 13, 2015, the Seoul High Public Prosecutor's Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff's claim on the ground that "information specified in attached Table 1 List 4 falls under Article 9 (1) 4 and 6 of the Information Disclosure Act and Article 22 (2) of the Rules on the Affairs for the Preservation of Public Prosecutor's Office."
C. On November 5, 2015, the Plaintiff again filed an application with the Defendant for the perusal and copying of the instant information, and the Defendant, around November 12, 2015, rejected the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that the instant information constitutes Article 22(1)2 and 4 of the Rules on the Military Prosecution Preservation Affairs.
(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). [The grounds for recognition] - The entry in Gap 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 14, 16 (including provisional numbers), Eul 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “information subject to non-disclosure” under Article 9(1) of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, the Defendant’s disposition of this case is unlawful.
3. Determination
A. Attached Form 1.