1. On February 2, 2017, the Defendant’s refusal to disclose to the Plaintiff the information listed in attached Form 1, as well as attached Form 2.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff was indicted on the violation of the Punishment Act of Minor Offenses (Creation of Indeption) and the charges of obstruction of performance of official duties (No. 2014 type No. 15941), and on November 28, 2014, the Defendant was convicted of a fine of KRW 5 million as to the above charges of sexual Nam-Nam support on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff, on May 9, 2014, made the victim B her drinking alcohol” (the Plaintiff, on the part of May 9, 2014, her 112 report, and assaulted the police officers dispatched after receiving 112 report).

The plaintiff appealed against the above judgment of the court of first instance and filed an appeal, but all of the appeals were dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive on August 27, 2015.

B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against B on the charge that “B filed a false report with the intent of having the Plaintiff subject to criminal punishment on May 9, 2014, with the intent of having the Plaintiff be subject to criminal punishment.” However, on June 30, 2015, the Sung-nam Branch Office of the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office rendered a non-prosecution disposition against B on the charge of having no suspicion (Evidence of Evidence).

(C) In the case of the non-prosecution of this case at the Sung-nam District Prosecutors' Office 2015 type 13463, hereinafter referred to as "the case of this case").

On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on the victim B’s 112 report management table (attached Form 1; hereinafter “Information”) at the time of the occurrence of the instant case No. 2014 type No. 15941 attached to the records of the instant non-prosecution case.

On February 2, 2017, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision on the Plaintiff’s above claim (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground of Article 22 subparag. 2 of the Rules on the Affairs of the Prosecutor’s Preservation, on the ground that “the disclosure of records is likely to cause considerable harm to the honor, privacy, safety of body, and peace of life of a person involved in the case.”

E. After that, on March 11, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office Administrative Appeals Commissions.