1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Case history

A. On November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that “financial transaction information, such as transaction details of bank accounts, operated by the Plaintiff, was leaked and used as an unfavorable evidence in civil and criminal cases related to the Plaintiff,” and filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of each information listed in the separate sheet.

B. On December 15, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the existence of the information on the grounds that each information listed in the separate sheet was not produced and received by the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “the existence of the instant information”) C.

On December 19, 2016, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the Defendant, but the Defendant dismissed it on the 28th of the same month.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including branch numbers in the case of additional number), Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. In the case of this case, in the part concerning the Defendant’s claim to revoke the notification of the existence of the information in the separate sheet Nos. 1 to 4 and 7 as to each information in the separate sheet No. 1 to 7, if the applicant did not retain and manage the information as specified in the public agency, there is no legal interest to

In this regard, the applicant for disclosure is responsible to prove that it is highly probable that he/she will hold and manage the information that he/she seeks disclosure.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Du9459, Jan. 13, 2006; 2010Du18918, Jan. 24, 2013). Where the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to find out that a third party requested the Defendant to provide financial transaction information, such as details of bank account transactions, to the Defendant. However, each of the above evidence alone is insufficient to find that there is a considerable probability that the Defendant retains and manages each information listed in the annexed list 1 through 4, and 7, and it is otherwise recognized.