1. Refusal of disclosure of information on the remaining information except for the information listed in the Appendix 2 List among the instant lawsuits.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a complaint of perjury with the Defendant on September 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for disclosure of the written opinion prepared by a senior judicial police officer belonging to the Daejeon Taeduk Police Station, Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office 2015 type No. 12675 type B, to disclose the written opinion prepared by the Defendant.

B. On September 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the disclosure of information (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s written opinion that the Plaintiff filed an application for disclosure was sent to the Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office, and that the Defendant did not hold and manage it.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 4, Eul No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the part of the lawsuit in this case, other than the information listed in the separate sheet No. 2 list, is legitimate to request revocation of information disclosure refusal

A. The Defendant’s principal safety defense, on October 16, 2015, disclosed to the Plaintiff the written opinion prepared by a judicial police officer who filed an application for information disclosure, and thus, there is no interest in the instant lawsuit.

B. The administrative litigation filed by the claimant against the disposition of non-disclosure of information shall lose the benefit of the lawsuit due to the disclosure of information by the respondent.

If Gap evidence Nos. 5 and Eul evidence Nos. 6 showed the overall purport of the pleadings, it can be acknowledged that the defendant, on Oct. 16, 2015, disclosed to the plaintiff on Oct. 16, 2015 the part of the opinion prepared by the judicial police officer of the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office 2015-Type 12675 of the perjury case No. 2015 (hereinafter "the opinion of this case") other than the information stated in the attached list No. 2, the plaintiff has no legal interest to seek revocation of the disposition rejecting the disclosure of information as to the remaining part of the Disposition of this case

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit is unlawful.

3. Whether the part of the instant disposition, which did not disclose the information listed in the separate sheet 2 is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is also information indicated in the attached list 2 of the instant written opinion.