The tourism industry is now changing to smart tourism, which maximizes tourists' overall tourism experience with the use of advanced mobile technologies and emphasizes the utilization of tourism information. Despite the quantitative expansion of the tourism industry, there is a lack of academic and practical discussion on tourism safety. Especially, in the context of walking tourism, tourists are more likely to be exposed to natural or social disasters and emergencies. Therefore, it is necessary to build a system that can provide walking tourists with safety information not only on dangerous factors which are anticipated to be confronted during a walking trip in advance but also on specific dangers in real time. Under the circumstances, this study seeks to identify the types of tourism safety information that can be offered by using publicly available open data, drawing on the safety information framework on the walking tourism that is presented in Choi et al. (2017)'s study. More specifically, this study focuses on the use of open data which is provided by the Korean government. Furthermore, this study verifies the types of safety information that are most urgently needed in walking travel situations. Specifically, this study aims to derive the importance and priority of each type of safety information for a walking trip by applying the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) analysis. For this, we collected 35 questionnaires from walking tour operators (practitioners) and walking tourists. The main results are as follows. First, natural disaster information is the most important factor in the top-level factor of safety information for walking tourists, followed by social disaster, life safety, and exhibition (security crisis) information. Second, information on natural disasters, environmental pollution, and weather is considered to be important at the sub-level factor. Lastly, the noteworthy result of this study is that the importance of each type of safety information varies depending on the walking tour operators (practitioners) and the walking tourists. That is, there is a recognition difference between the operator (practitioner) and the user in the importance and priority of the safety information of the walking trip. Therefore, it is necessary to develop policies and services reflecting the opinions of potential users when providing safety information so that the most importantly recognized information can be provided first.