1. On July 16, 2015, among the decision to disclose information on each of the documents listed in the separate sheet No. 1 attached hereto that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on July 16, 2015.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 7, 2015, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to disclose the information on each of the documents listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

B. Accordingly, the Defendant received a written opinion from the Intervenor, who is the Intervenor joining the Defendant, upon notification to the Intervenor, on July 16, 2015, based on Article 9(1)7 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) and Article 83 of the concession agreement entered into between the Republic of Korea and the Intervenor, on the ground that the document requested disclosure of information is related to the process of concluding the contract and the result of the contract, and the document requested non-disclosure as a result of the third party’s hearing of opinions. In the event of disclosure, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the non-disclosure decision on July 16, 2015.

C. After seeking the revocation of the original non-disclosure decision, the Plaintiff sought the revocation of each of the documents listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant information”) during the proceeding of the instant lawsuit (hereinafter referred to as the “instant refusal disposition”), thereby modifying the purport of the claim.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 83 of the concession agreement of the Plaintiff’s assertion is not a ground for non-disclosure under the Information Disclosure Act, and even if the instant information is disclosed, the Intervenor’s legitimate interest is not likely to be significantly harmed. Thus, the instant refusal disposition is unlawful

3. Attached Form 3 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

4. Determination

A. In fact 1, the Intervenor is entitled to conduct a private investment facility project (hereinafter “instant project”) from the Defendant, which is located within the scope of the Seoul Outline Circulation (Japan-Yakwon) Expressway (hereinafter “instant project”).

(1) On December 14, 200, the concession agreement for the instant project between the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the “instant concession agreement”) is the concessionaire who is designated as the concessionaire and is implementing the instant project.