1. Attached Form that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on November 22, 2017

1. The disposition of non-permission of copying of documents entered in the list shall be revoked;

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 8, 2016, the Plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment by the Gwangju District Court for the crime of quasi-indecent act by compulsion, and one year and six months and five years and order to disclose personal information and to attach an electronic device for five years and five years and filed an appeal and appeal, but all of the appeals were dismissed, and the judgment was finalized on January 25, 2017.

B. On November 22, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for a copy of the investigation records of the instant case (No. 1, 2016 type No. 28051 of the Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office), ① written opinions, ② criminal papers, ③ voluntary criminal reports, ④ investigation reports, ⑤ written statements, ⑤ investigation direction proposals, and 7) investigation instructions, and a copy of the attachment order request.

C. On November 22, 2017, the Defendant permitted the Plaintiff to make a copy of the investigation record of the above copying application: (5) The protocol of statement, (6) the investigation direction proposal, and (7) the protocol of attachment order to the Plaintiff; (1) the written opinion, (2) the criminal offender, (3) the voluntary criminal report, (4) the investigation report, and (6)

1. Documents in the list, and “instant information” (hereinafter referred to as “instant information”).

(1) The lower court rejected the same on the ground that the document was not submitted to the court or was inadmissible as evidence during the trial (hereinafter “instant non-permission disposition”) with the internal document of the investigative agency, and that the document was not used as evidence.

(D) In the instant lawsuit, the Defendant is entitled to the Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) as a ground for non-disclosure of the instant information, which led to the instant lawsuit.

Article 9(1)4 (information pertaining to an investigation, which has a reasonable ground to believe that the performance of duties would significantly be difficult if disclosed) was added. [The fact that there is no ground for recognition, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under the proviso of Article 9(1)4 of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, the instant disposition contrary thereto is unlawful.

(b) relation.