1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

On June 30, 2014, the defendant is listed in the annexed Table 1 as against the plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

B et al. filed a complaint with the plaintiff in Incheon District Prosecutors' Office, but on September 19, 2008, the plaintiff was prosecuted by the prosecutor D of Incheon District Prosecutors' Office.

On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the inspection and copying of the entire records of the said criminal case [written opinions, written complaints, written statements of the complainant, written statements of the attendance request, written notifications of the investigation report, C’s written statements, investigation results report, suggestion of investigation direction, written statement of the appeal, written reasons for appeal, written statement of the investigation report (written statement of the other party to the second party to the appeal), written decision (hereinafter “instant information”)] on the grounds of “fact confirmation, the use of civil procedure, the submission of the attorney’s office, and separate complaint.”

On June 30, 2014, the Defendant rendered a provisional disposition of refusing to allow the Plaintiff to inspect and copy the instant information (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the entire information of this case constitutes Article 22(1)2 of the Rules on the Affairs to Preserve the Prosecutor’s Office (a disclosure of records may seriously undermine the honor, privacy, safety of life and body, and peace of life of a person involved in the instant case).

In the instant lawsuit, the Defendant added Article 9(1)6 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) to the grounds for non-disclosure of the instant information, which is deemed likely to infringe on the confidentiality or freedom of privacy if disclosed.

【In the absence of dispute, each entry of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including a serial number), and the Prosecutor's Office Preservation Affairs Rules, which are merely the administrative rules of the plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of disposition of the whole pleadings, cannot be used as the grounds for the instant disposition. The instant information does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure as provided in the subparagraphs of Article 9 (1) of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, is unlawful.