beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the Defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. A citizen’s right to know, in particular, the right to access information held and managed by a public institution is recognized in relation to the freedom of expression, which is a fundamental right under our Constitution, and the content of such right includes the general right to request disclosure of information held and managed by any public institution.
Therefore, in principle, a citizen’s claim for disclosure of information shall be widely permitted unless it falls under information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9 of the former Act on the Disclosure of Information by Public Institutions (amended by Act No. 11991, Aug. 6, 2013). However, in cases where it is evident that an applicant for disclosure of information intends to obtain unjust benefits which cannot be accepted by social norms by using the information disclosure system without any intention to acquire or utilize the relevant information, or where it is evident that the applicant falls under abuse of rights, such as where he/she makes a request for disclosure for the purpose of
2.(a)
According to the records, the plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for more than three years and six months, and repeatedly filed a lawsuit seeking the disclosure of information with several government agencies over several times. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disclosure of information throughout the country (hereinafter referred to as "litigation seeking the disclosure of information"). ② In multiple cases, the administrative agency decided to disclose or partially disclose the plaintiff's information, but the plaintiff did not receive the relevant information. ③ The plaintiff did not receive the information, ③ The plaintiff decided to distribute the fees of the attorney to the attorney who won the lawsuit claiming the disclosure of information and received the fees of the attorney after the final procedure for litigation costs was established at the interview with the staff of the correctional institution, or the plaintiff decided to distribute them to the attorney.