1. The Defendant’s rejection disposition against the Plaintiff on January 18, 2013 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a request for disclosure of information with the disclosure of a notice of decision (excluding personal information) on the claim determined for disclosure and partial disclosure among all (other than the Plaintiff) applications filed with the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office (hereinafter “instant information”).

B. On January 18, 2013, the Defendant rejected disclosure on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)6 of the former Official Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 11991, Aug. 6, 2013; hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 1

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. The proviso of Article 9(1) of the Information Disclosure Act provides that “Any information falling under any of the following subparagraphs need not be disclosed to the public,” and subparagraph 6 of the same Article provides that “personal information, such as name, resident registration number, etc. included in the relevant information, which, if disclosed, is likely to infringe on the privacy or freedom of individuals.”

In light of the records, the information of this case consists of the requested information, contents of disclosure, contents of non-disclosure, reasons for disclosure, methods of disclosure, calculation of fees, etc. The information is not included in the pertinent information that is disclosed to the original applicant, and it does not seem to include information that is likely to infringe on the privacy or freedom of individuals if it is excluded from personal information

Therefore, the instant disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s claim for information disclosure on the ground that the instant information constitutes Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act is unlawful.

3.