logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2020.07.03 2020누10172
정보공개거부처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Paragraph 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance is same.

Reasons

1. The first instance court rejected the claim for cancellation of the part of the report on the results of the study on the use of research and development project costs among the information listed in paragraph (3) of the attached Table among the instant lawsuit, and accepted the part of the information listed in paragraphs 2, 3, 5, and 6 of the same Table (excluding the part of the report on the results of the examination on the use of research and development project costs among the information listed in paragraph (3)) and dismissed the remainder

The defendant only appealed against the above cited portion, and thus, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the part cited by the court of first instance.

2. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the disclosure of information as to each information listed in the separate sheet, and on January 9, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision with respect to the Plaintiff not to disclose information pursuant to Article 9 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). (b)

Accordingly, on January 30, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition with the Defendant. On February 22, 2019, the Defendant dismissed the instant objection with respect to the information stated in attached Tables 1, 3, 4, and 6, pursuant to Article 9(1)5 and 7 of the Information Disclosure Act, and with respect to the information described in attached Tables 2 and 5, the information is confidential pursuant to Article 9(1)5 of the Information Disclosure Act.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 4, 5, and Eul No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to disclose each information listed in the separate sheet in order to secure transparency in the process of selecting a person subject to the research task, to implement policies of public institutions, or to secure transparency in administrative procedures. Of the information listed in the separate sheet, each information listed in paragraphs 2, 3, 5, and 6 of the information listed in the separate sheet is excluded from the part of the report on the results of the examination on the actual use of the research project costs

arrow