The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 9(1)2 of the former Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 11991, Aug. 6, 2013; hereinafter “former Information Disclosure Act”) provides for information pertaining to diplomatic relations, which, if disclosed, may seriously undermine the national interest, if disclosed, and information, which, if disclosed, has considerable grounds to believe that fair performance of duties would significantly interfere with the fair process of decision-making or internal review (Article 9(1)5). In cases where the information claimed to be disclosed is mixed with the information subject to non-disclosure and the part that falls under the information subject to non-disclosure and that can be disclosed, and where two parts can be separated to the extent that does not violate the purport of the request for disclosure, the information subject to non-disclosure shall be excluded.

(Article 14).2. The lower court determined as follows.

1. The purpose of the Korea Military Information Protection Agreement and the Korea Military Support Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Agreement”) is to provide munitions and services of the two countries and to mutually share and guarantee classified military information.

② The key information of the instant case claimed by the Plaintiff includes the details of specific arguments and response made between the two countries during the course of negotiations on the instant agreement, the details of consultations on each subject, the differences in views between the two countries, and the strategies for negotiations on such differences.

③ If the information on the issues of this case is disclosed, there is sufficient room for Korea to be used as information on negotiations between the other countries of the agreement when concluding a similar agreement as it is exposed to the Korean response strategies or the position of the other countries of Japan related to the conclusion of the agreement of this case. In addition, there is serious conflict between the other countries’ diplomatic trust and the other countries’ diplomatic trust.