1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part against the chief of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office and the chief of the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office is respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 23, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed B and C on suspicion of attempted fraud, etc. (Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office 2013 type 37017). However, the prosecutor of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office (Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office 2013 type 37017) issued a non-prosecution disposition on March 31, 2014

On April 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the above disposition of non-prosecution with the Chief of the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office, but the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office dismissed the appeal.

B. The Plaintiff filed another complaint with B and C on charges of preparing false official documents (Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office 2014 type 17252, 2014 type 19693 case), and the prosecutor of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office issued a non-prosecution disposition on September 11, 2014.

On October 13, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the disposition of non-prosecution with the Chief of the Seoul High Prosecutor's Office (Seoul High Prosecutor's Office 2014 High Prosecutor's Office and 11566), but the Seoul High Prosecutor's Office dismissed the appeal on November 18, 2014.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office 2014 type No. 17252, 2014 type No. 19693 at the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office (Seoul High Court 2014 type No. 5297), but was dismissed on March 2, 2015 and re-appealed on March 17, 2015 (Supreme Court Decision 2015Mo1378), but was dismissed on July 17, 2015.

On the other hand, on September 29, 2014 and October 1, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the director of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office 2014-type, 17252, 2014-type, and 19693 to disclose video data stored in the CCTV of the economic team office, which was bound in investigation records, on two occasions, on the grounds that the head of the district public prosecutor's office of the Seoul Western District Public Prosecutor's Office was recorded and that the head of the district public prosecutor's office of the Seoul Western District Public Prosecutor's Office (hereinafter "the Seoul District Public Prosecutor's Office") made a non-disclosure disposition on October 10, 2014.

E. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the chief public prosecutor of the Seoul High Public Prosecutor's Office requesting the Seoul High Public Prosecutor's Office to re-examine the case of non-prosecution disposition.