1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

The father B, who is the father of the plaintiff, was diagnosed with cancer since February 2010 and received treatment at the Seoul Asan Hospital.

On July 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information on “the part receiving the medical expenses of B” (hereinafter “instant information”) in the ledger for the receipt of the principal charges submitted by the Seoul Asan Hospital.

On July 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to disclose information on the ground that “the Plaintiff is not in receipt and management of the instant information.”

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the part of the claim for confirmation of illegality of omission by Gap’s evidence 1-1 and 2 and the entire purport of the argument is lawful. The Plaintiff did not take any measure against the Defendant, even though the Seoul Asan Hospital requested the Defendant to take an administrative disposition, such as restitution of unjust enrichment, against the Defendant’s claim for confirmation of medical expenses and the claim for a civil petition for the confirmation of illegality of omission. Thus, the Defendant’s omission is unlawful.

This part of the defendant's claim on the defense of this safety defense is unlawful because there is no standing to sue, or there is no illegal omission.

Judgment

A lawsuit seeking confirmation of illegality of omission can be instituted only by a person who has filed an application for a disposition and has a legal interest in seeking confirmation of illegality of omission. Accordingly, a response by an administrative agency seeking such action must be related to the disposition stipulated in Article 2 (1) 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act. Thus, where a party does not file an application for an administrative act against an administrative agency, or even if a party filed such application, does not have any legal or logical right to require the administrative agency to engage in such administrative act, or where the administrative agency has rejected the application of a party, the party shall be standing to sue.