1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 17, 2019, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to disclose the information recorded in the attached list to the public.

B. On July 29, 2019, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a notice of the partial disclosure decision to disclose the part other than personal information among the “education details for the last five years of the members of the council of occupants’ representatives (representative of each Dong) of multi-family housing within the jurisdiction of the Si/Eup/Myeon” with respect to the information listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list, and issued the information to the Plaintiff regarding the information listed in paragraph (2) of the attached list

C. On August 16, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gangwon-do Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on October 28, 2019, the claim was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine ex officio the legality of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the determination of the legality of the instant lawsuit.

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claim for revocation of a disposition rejecting the disclosure of information in the separate sheet No. 1, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant disclosed information in the separate sheet No. 1 to the Plaintiff during the proceeding of the instant lawsuit. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for revocation of a disposition rejecting the disclosure of information in the separate sheet No. 1 is unlawful as there is no benefit

B. In light of the fact that the information disclosure system is a system that discloses information held and managed by public institutions to determine the legality of a claim for revocation of a disposition rejecting the disclosure of information as stated in the attached list No. 2, it is sufficient to prove that the person seeking the disclosure of information has a considerable probability of holding and managing the information that is sought by the administrative agency. However, where a public institution does not retain and manage such information, the revocation of the disposition rejecting