1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On November 25, 2014, A requested the Defendant to disclose information on the details of attorney fees (the name of counsel, the name of a corporation in charge, the amount of fees, the date of payment, or the due date of payment) paid or scheduled to be paid by the Ministry of Justice in 2012-2014. On December 5, 2014, the Defendant made a non-disclosure decision on the ground that the above information falls under Article 9(1)4 and 7 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”). On December 8, 2014, A requested the Central Administrative Appeals Commission to revoke the above non-disclosure decision. On August 11, 2015, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling that the aforementioned non-disclosure decision was revoked (hereinafter “the instant ruling”). On September 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) disclosed the information to the public or made payment to the Plaintiff and the defense counsel under Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire argument of this case as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate constitutes non-disclosure information under Article 9(1)4, 5 and 7 of the Information Disclosure Act.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

The Information Disclosure Act, as to whether information constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)4 of the former Information Disclosure Act, guarantees the people's right to know and secure citizens' participation in state affairs and transparency in state affairs by prescribing necessary matters concerning the people's request for disclosure of information held and managed by public institutions and the duty to disclose information.