1. On January 3, 2018, the case records of the Seoul High Prosecutor’s Office (Seoul High Prosecutor’s Office) issued by the Defendant against the Plaintiffs on January 3, 2017 are as follows.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From around 2013 to D (hereinafter “D”), Plaintiff A provided services, such as clothinging work, to Plaintiff B from around August 2013 with the trade name “E”, and Plaintiff B supplied male and female nices to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”). On March 22, 2017, the Plaintiffs filed a complaint with the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor’s Office (Seoul Central Public Prosecutor’s Office 2017 type No. 26167) on fraud, violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) (hereinafter “G et al.”) against G et al. on November 21, 2017.

B. On December 26, 2017, the Plaintiffs appealed against the disposition of non-prosecution (Seoul High Prosecutor’s Office No. 2017 High Prosecutor’s Office No. 14848, hereinafter “instant criminal case”).

C. On January 3, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed a request with the Defendant for a copy of the instant criminal case records, but on January 3, 2018, the prosecutor of the Seoul High Prosecutor’s Office notified the Plaintiffs of the refusal of copying of the instant information on the grounds of Article 22(1)2 and 4 of the Rules on the Military Prosecution Preservation Affairs.

(hereinafter “Disposition rejecting Copy of this case”). 【Disposition rejecting Copy of this case’s case’s / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap’s 1 through 6 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) The refusal disposition of the copy of this case is limited to the grounds for the rules on prosecutorial preservation affairs with no legal effect, as well as the information listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter "information of this case") among the information listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

The Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) provides for the following:

Since it is apparent that the case does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure, the defendant refused to copy the instant information during the defendant's refusal disposition.