1. On March 26, 2015, the records in the case No. 2014 and No. 12633 of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office, which the Defendant reported to the Plaintiff on March 26, 2015, are as follows.

On April 2, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against B on April 2, 2014 (Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office 2014 type No. 12633), but the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office rendered a disposition that he/she was not suspected of committing a crime against B on August 12, 2014, and the Plaintiff again filed a criminal complaint against B on February 28, 2015 for violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Fraud).

On March 25, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on a copy of the original 549 Klototo Lottery (hereinafter “instant information”) submitted by the NAF on August 4, 2014, among the records in the instant case No. 2014-type No. 12633, Aug. 4, 2014.

On March 26, 2015, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s inspection and copying of the instant information in accordance with Article 22(1)2 of the Rules on the Military Prosecutor’s Affairs (where disclosure of records is likely to seriously undermine the honor, privacy, safety of life and body, and peace of life of a person involved in the instant case) and Article 22(1)2 of the Rules on the Military Prosecutor’s Affairs (where disclosure of records is likely to cause confidential or unnecessary disputes, disclosure of records may cause confidential or unnecessary disputes).

(2) Article 22 of the Rules on the Business of Collecting Prosecutions, Etc., which is merely an administrative rule on administrative affairs within an administrative agency with no legal basis, shall not be deemed a legal basis for the instant disposition, and the instant information does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure as provided by Article 9(1)3, 4, and 6 of the Official Information Disclosure Act.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition refusing to allow to peruse and copy the instant information on different premise is unlawful.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

Judgment

The defendant disclosed the information of this case to the plaintiff under the provisions of Article 22 of the Rules of the Prosecution Preservation Affairs.