1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Request to the Minister of Health and Welfare;

A. (1) On August 31, 2016, the Plaintiff is the Defendant Minister of Health and Welfare (hereinafter “Defendant Minister”) (hereinafter “Defendant Minister”).

) The fifth meeting minutes of the administrative disposition review committee (hereinafter “instant information”) by the Ministry of Health and Welfare

A) A claim was filed by Defendant Minister for disclosure of information. The Defendant Minister established and operated the Plaintiff on September 12, 2016 with a view to enhancing the propriety and rationality of administrative disposition against medical personnel, and the agenda items are related to an individual’s administrative disposition, and thus, the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

) A decision to keep the instant information confidential pursuant to Article 9(1)6 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(2) On September 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition. However, on October 5, 2016, the Defendant Minister dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the ground that the instant information constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act, because it constitutes information that could infringe on the privacy or freedom of an individual even if it excludes personal identification information, such as personal information. The instant information constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)6 of the Information Disclosure Act. The instant information is recorded as information of the decision-making process as it is equivalent to the information of the decision-making process, and if it is considered in mind, it is highly likely that the members will not freely deliberate, and thus, it constitutes information subject to non-disclosure

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition does not constitute a non-disclosure subject under Article 9(1)5 and 6 of the Information Disclosure Act, and even if part of the instant information constitutes a non-disclosure subject, the part that could be disclosed and the part that constitutes a non-disclosure subject is combined, and thus contravenes the purport