1. The Defendant’s refusal to disclose information on July 31, 2018 to the Plaintiff as indicated in the attached Table 1.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Plaintiff as the head of the Chuncheon District Prosecutors’ Office No. 2016-type 3664, on July 11, 2016, under the following purport: (a) “The Plaintiff, in collusion with C, assaulted C, claimed that the Plaintiff was in a superior position on the part of C’s item, and submitted a medical certificate to the Seocho Police Station, and filed a false report.”

B. On October 26, 2016, the prosecutor rendered a non-prosecution disposition against the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) on October 26, 2016, the prosecutor was suspected of having committed a non-prosecution disposition.

C. On July 30, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for a copying of the records under Articles 2016 and 3664 (hereinafter “the records of this case”). However, on July 31, 2018, the Defendant: (a) granted permission for copying of the records to the Plaintiff’s cell phone text messages (146 pages); and (b) on the relevant documents for which the disclosure of the records would seriously undermine the honor or privacy of the persons concerned, the safety of life and body, and the peace of life; and (c) subparagraph 2 of Article 22 of the Rules on the Preservation of Prosecution’s Office (hereinafter “instant non-permission disposition”) of the Rules on the Preservation of Prosecution’s Office (hereinafter “the disclosure of records”), and subparagraph 4 of the same Article of the same Act, “the disclosure of records would seriously cause or threaten to cause confidential or unnecessary disclosure of confidential information in the investigative method or create new disputes, etc.

On September 4, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking partial revocation of the instant non-permission disposition.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the non-permission disposition in this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion can not allow the plaintiff's claim for perusal and copy of the information listed in the annexed Table 1 (hereinafter "the information of this case") under Article 22 of the Rules on Prosecution Preservation Affairs. The information of this case is public institution.