logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.08.11 2016구단10308
정보공개거부처분취소
Text

1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 4, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition with the head of Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office 2015 High Prosecutors’ Office (Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office 2015 type 1315 type 151) and the Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office 2015 type 1458 (No. 2015 type 606) to disclose all investigation records of each of the above cases except for the records submitted by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office”), and filed a petition with the head of Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office 2015 (hereinafter “instant information”).

B. On November 10, 2015, Defendant Gwangju High Prosecutor rejected the disclosure of the instant information on the grounds that it constitutes information subject to non-disclosure pursuant to Article 9(1)4 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【Ground for Recognition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s No. 1, No. 1-1, purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant information is the records of the instant case filed by the Plaintiff, and constitutes information necessary for the procedures of dissatisfaction and the exercise of rights for recovery from damage, and thus, it does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure. As such, the instant disposition by the Defendant Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office is unlawful. 2) The Plaintiff filed a request for disclosure of information against the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office and received a favorable judgment in the relevant case, and thus, the Defendant Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office refused disclosure in violation of the duty to disclose the instant information and obstructed the Plaintiff’s exercise of rights. As such, the Defendant Republic is liable to compensate the Plaintiff

B. The information of this case by the Defendants is no longer owned and managed by Defendant Gwangju High Prosecutors on the grounds of re-investigation order or application for adjudication, etc.

arrow