2014Nu49271 Revocation of Disposition Rejecting Information Disclosure

A

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2013Guhap23348 decided April 17, 2014

September 4, 2014

October 2, 2014

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on August 30, 2013 is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed or dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reason why the court's reasoning is stated in this decision is as stated in Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance is the same as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance, in addition to the dismissal of part of the judgment of the

2. Parts to be dried;

A. No. 10-11 of the first instance court's first instance court's decision stated that "the plaintiff claimed information disclosure on the part other than personal information among the interrogation protocol No. 7, B, which appears to be purporting to seek information disclosure on the remaining part other than personal information." In requesting information disclosure on the information of this case, "the plaintiff stated that "the information of this case is excluded from personal information" (see evidence No. 1). It appears to be the purport of claiming information disclosure on the remaining part other than personal information that is likely to infringe on the privacy or freedom, such as personal identification information."

B. No. 15 of the 7th judgment of the first instance court stated that "the part falls under B, occupation, and residence constitutes personal identification information" is "the part corresponding to information that could infringe on the privacy or freedom of individuals, such as B, occupation, residence, etc.".

3. Conclusion

Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges in fixed form of judge

Judges Gangseo-gu

Judges Cho Young-soo