1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for confirmation of illegality of the omission shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Details of ruling;

A. On October 23, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for the disclosure of information with respect to (i) the instant documents related to the Plaintiff on September 16, 2014; (ii) the entire relevant documents generated in relation to the Plaintiff on September 10, 2014; and (iii) the documents related to the instant documents that the Plaintiff’s wife assaulted the Plaintiff on September 10, 2014; and (iv) the reported telephone and D related documents from January 1, 2014 to October 2, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “instant case ①; (ii) the instant information was not owned; and (iii) the information pertaining to the instant case was disclosed to the Plaintiff on October 31, 2014; and (iv) the information pertaining to the instant documents Nos. 1, 3,4, 5, 16, 17, 218, 201; and (iv) the information was disclosed to the public; and

(hereinafter referred to as “instant rejection disposition of the first disclosure of information”). (b)

In addition, on October 23, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for information disclosure on the dispatch details of 112 declarations with respect to reporting telephone C and D from January 23, 2014 to October 2, 2014. On October 31, 2014, the head of the relevant field police station made a decision to disclose only the dispatch details of 112 declarations with respect to the Plaintiff on October 31, 2014.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second disposition of refusing the disclosure of information in this case”).

On November 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Defendant seeking revocation of the first disposition of refusal to disclose the information of this case with the chief of the Seosan Police Station as the respondent (No. 2014-23443). On March 24, 2015, the Defendant dismissed the part of the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of the disposition of refusal to disclose the information of this case on the grounds that “the chief of the Seosan Police Station is not holding the information of this case ①, ② the part of the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of the disposition of refusal to disclose the information of this case, and the chief of the Seosan Police Station, without any reason for