1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, as an attorney-at-law, is the Nonparty B (hereinafter “Nonindicted”) who is in the position of suspect or claimant in the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office 2016 type No. 53529 and the Tax Tribunal 2016 middle 1151.

B. On August 12, 2016, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to disclose and request the following information (hereinafter “instant information”).

- In the case of Incheon District Prosecutors' Office 2016-type 53529, a copy of the passbook (including attached documents) that served as the basis for the assessment of value-added tax on the Nonparty’s accusation

C. On August 22, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the non-disclosure decision of the instant information on the following grounds:

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). - Details of financial transactions shall not be disclosed pursuant to Article 9(1)1 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) and Article 4(4) of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality (hereinafter “Real Name Financial Transactions Act”) (hereinafter “Real Name Financial Transactions Act”) (this case’s disposition”). There is no dispute as to whether there is any entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Since the proviso of Article 9(1) of the Plaintiff’s Claim for Information Disclosure Act stipulates that the decision on whether to disclose information under the above Act shall be made by discretionary action, even if the instant information constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)1 of the same Act, the Defendant shall again determine whether to disclose information by comparing and comparing the construction profit.

However, the information of this case is the only information to clarify the non-party's innocence, which would seriously infringe the non-party's fundamental rights if not disclosed. Nevertheless, the decision that the defendant decided not to disclose the information of this case is unlawful against the principle of proportionality.

(b) Entry in the attached statutes of the relevant statutes;

(c) 1 non-disclosure information.