1. On January 20, 2016, the Defendant’s decision not to disclose the information on the claim stated in the separate sheet issued to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2...

1. On January 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on the claim information indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant information”). However, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on January 20, 2016 on the ground that the disclosure of the case number in which the parties are specified could infringe on the privacy or freedom of individuals by easily combining the information with other information.

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

2. The main text of Article 9(1) of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) provides that “Any information held and managed by a public institution shall be disclosed to the public,” and the proviso of the same Article provides that “if disclosed to the public, any information pertaining to an individual, such as the name and resident registration number, etc., which is deemed likely to infringe on the privacy or the freedom of privacy, may not be disclosed to the public.”

However, in light of the following circumstances and facts, each statement of evidence Nos. 3 through 8, which can be acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings, the instant disposition made by the Defendant on the ground of Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act is unlawful.

① The instant information that the Plaintiff sought to disclose is merely a case number and does not themselves constitute information that is deemed likely to infringe on the privacy or freedom of individuals if disclosed.

② The Plaintiff filed a request for disclosure of the instant information to file a copy of the judgment (a request for a copy of the judgment shall be filed by specifying the case number), and may prevent infringement of privacy or freedom through the process of anonymous processing when disclosing the judgment.

On the other hand, the defendant.