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

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2

2. The judgment of the Defendant on this case’s defense is to the effect that there is no legal interest in seeking revocation of the disposition of this case, since the Defendant did not retain and manage the information that the Plaintiff seeks to disclose.

In light of the fact that the information disclosure system is a system that discloses information held and managed by public institutions in its state, it is sufficient to prove that it is highly probable that a person seeking information disclosure will hold and manage the information that is sought by administrative agencies.

However, if a public institution fails to retain and manage such information, there is no legal interest to seek revocation of the disposition rejecting information disclosure, unless there is a special reason to the contrary.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Du9459, Jan. 13, 2006). Meanwhile, in the case of information held and managed in an electronic form, even if the information is not at the request of the claimant, a public institution that received the request for disclosure retains and manages basic data for information subject to disclosure request in an electronic form, and searches basic data using computer hardware, software, and technical expertise used ordinarily by the relevant public institution and searches such basic data, and if such work does not cause particular hindrance to the computer system operation of the relevant institution, the public institution can be deemed to possess and manage the information subject to disclosure request, and in such a case, searching and editing basic data is generated or new information.