1.The judgment of the first instance, including any claim that has been reduced or added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. Under Article 2(2) of the Private School Act, the status of the parties is the educational foundation that establishes and operates a private school pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 3 (d) of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”). Defendant I established and operates the “G University,” which is a public institution under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Defendant University”). At the time of 2013-2014, Defendant I was the president of the Defendant University, Defendant D’s president of the University, and the head of the Defendant University’s management department at the time of 2013-2014, Defendant E was the head of the Defendant University’s University, the head of the tax affairs department at the law school at the time of 2014, and Defendant F was the student who entered the Defendant University in the actual foreign language on March 1, 2011.

B. 1) The Defendant University operated a “free bulletin board” on its website (hereinafter “free bulletin board”) and had its students exchange their opinions freely on the Internet. From June 26, 2013 to July 10, 2013, the Defendant University conducted an online survey on the change of the test method against the students of the Defendant University. On July 22, 2013, the online test method in the Defendant University was changed from the one-time examination method to the one-time examination method in the previous two-time examination method. (2) The Plaintiff raised an issue about the change of the test method in the Defendant University’s homepage, and during that process, there was a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.

3. On December 20, 2013, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant University to disclose the information on the number of participants in the said survey and the results thereof. However, on December 31, 2013, the Defendant University requested the Plaintiff to disclose the information in the process of decision-making or internal review.