위법확인
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On November 10, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a civil petition against the Commissioner General of the National Police Agency to the effect that “the Plaintiff’s response to the civil petition filed as of September 6, 2012 was wrong.” The Commissioner General of the National Police Agency sent the said civil petition to the Seosungsung Police Station, and the Police Officer of the same police station sent the same civil petition to the court on November 20, 2012, to the effect that “the police officer of the police station, who belongs to the same police station, submitted all necessary matters related to the case in progress,” and sent the same content to the Plaintiff on November 21, 2012 and March 13, 2014.
B. On February 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission (the Commissioner General of the National Police Agency without notifying the Plaintiff of the civil petition) stating that “The Commissioner General of the Seosung-gu Police Agency respondeds to the Plaintiff without notifying the Plaintiff of the civil petition is in violation of Article 15 of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act and is identical to the omission of the civil petition reply, and the Commissioner of the National Police Agency shall reply to the Plaintiff.”
(Case Number 2014-03941, hereinafter referred to as “instant adjudication”). (c)
On July 17, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to disclose the name, personal information, etc. (name, resident registration number, address, contact number, Handphone number, etc.) of the administrative appeal committee of this case to the Defendant. However, on July 28, 2014, the Defendant made a decision to disclose only the name, occupation, and standing member of the members participating in the instant judgment, and the remaining information is not disclosed.
(Service on July 31, 2014 was served on the Plaintiff, and hereinafter referred to as "the decision of this case") D.
On August 18, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed to the instant decision and filed the instant lawsuit.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings]
2. The decision of this case by the Plaintiff is related to the disclosure of information by public institutions.