1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. One-half of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in the business of distributing motion pictures and video products under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a person who gives the rating of motion pictures, video products, performances, and their advertising and publicity materials according to the Promotion of the Motion Pictures and Video Products Act.

B. (1) On April 24, 2012, the Plaintiff produced advertising films (title C: hereinafter “the instant video pictures”) that promote the treatment and diagnosis of cognitive behaviors that the general public gambling, and submitted to the Defendant data on rating review.

(2) On April 25, 2012, the Defendant issued a film rating certificate (advertisement film) to the Plaintiff on April 25, 2012. ① film rating number: D, ② film rating number: E, and issued a film rating certificate (advertisement film).

C. (1) On February 18, 2013, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to “this case’s video is reproduced without permission, so the copy of the data submitted to obtain a rating application shall be affixed with the seal of “original comparison.”

Accordingly, the defendant rejected on February 25, 2013 on the ground that "data submitted at the time of classification review or its copy shall not be provided."

(2) On May 29, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for disclosure of information regarding “all the documents and review materials submitted at the time of rating review of the instant video works.”

Accordingly, on June 5, 2013, the Defendant made a decision to disclose the information, and on June 14, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a second claim for the disclosure of information on the ground that “The two copies of Cinematographic Contents (hereinafter “the document of this case”) were omitted as indicated in the attached list.”

(3) On June 21, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision to respect the instant documents (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff sent all the data requested by the Plaintiff and did not have any data omitted.”

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 5, 7, .