1. On June 10, 2018, the Defendant’s deliberation by the Taxpayer Protection Committee affiliated with the National Tax Service on the Plaintiff on June 10, 2018.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 11, 2018, B filed a request for a review on the protection of rights to claim that the “tax investigation on the income tax reverted to year 2016,” which began with respect to May 9, 2018, falls under a double tax investigation contrary to Article 81-4 of the Framework Act on National Taxes and that the suspension of the tax investigation is different.

B. On June 1, 2018, the Taxpayer Protection Committee affiliated with the National Tax Service (hereinafter “instant Committee”) held a meeting to deliberate on the aforementioned request for review (hereinafter “instant meeting”).

The Plaintiff, a certified tax accountant, was present at the instant meeting on behalf of B.

The instant commission made a decision to dismiss the request for review on the protection of B’s rights on the same day.

C. On June 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Defendant for information disclosure seeking disclosure of “the name, post, and supporting and opposing opinion of the members present at the meeting of this case.”

The Defendant, on June 10, 2018, may substantially interfere with the Plaintiff’s smooth performance of duties and the fair and transparent operation of the external committee if the list of external committee members is disclosed. As such, information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) is the case’s meeting. The same is applicable to the instant meeting prior to the amendment by Presidential Decree No. 81-18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes and the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29534, Feb.

(D) A disposition rejecting the disclosure of information was rendered on the ground that the information constitutes information not disclosed pursuant to Article 63-16(10) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On October 15, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a petition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission for a ruling seeking disclosure of "a copy of the written review opinion submitted by the members after recording the personal information of the members present at the meeting of the instant case and their personal opinion and the personal opinion of the members," which was dismissed on December 21, 2018.

The Central Administrative Appeals Commission shall take the procedure of the ruling.