The case holding that the calculation method, etc. of the cost of the land development of the Korea Land Corporation does not constitute "information concerning business secrets of corporations, organizations, or individuals, which, if disclosed, is likely to seriously harm legitimate interests of corporations, etc." under the main sentence of Article 7 (1) 7 of the former Official Information Disclosure Act.

The case holding that when the Korea Land Corporation's profit is different from the profit of business promotion by disclosing the information on the same, and thereby securing transparency in the development cost calculation process and preventing harm caused by the abuse of administrative convenience, form principle and authority by government-invested institutions inside, it does not constitute "information related to business secrets of corporations, organizations or individuals, which, if disclosed, are deemed likely to seriously harm legitimate interests of corporations, etc." under the main sentence of Article 7 (1) 7 of the former Official Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 7127 of Jan. 29, 2004).

Articles 2 subparag. 3 and 7(1)7 of the former Official Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 7127 of Jan. 29, 2004) (see current Article 9(1)7)

Pakistan Cultural Information Industrial Complex (Law Firm Southern River, Attorneys Lee Lee-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Korea Land Corporation (Attorney Song-tae, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

o October 6, 2005

1. The defendant's refusal to disclose information described in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the attached Table 1 against the plaintiff on May 18, 2004 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The purpose of the Plaintiff is to establish a cultural industrial complex in order to enhance the economic status of its members by constructing a publishing cultural industrial complex and to promote the balanced development of the national economy, such joint projects as production, processing, receiving orders, sales, storage, transportation, and other services, and projects for the creation, management, and operation of industrial complexes and common facilities. The Defendant is a government-invested institution as a corporation established under the Korea Land Corporation Act with the aim of promoting the efficient utilization of land resources by having the acquisition, management, development, and supply of land, and by promoting the comprehensive utilization, development, and

B. On August 31, 1998, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of sites for industrial facilities to purchase a total of 170,477 square meters of land within 18 lots of land in the Pakistan Cultural Information Industrial Complex, which is created by the Defendant located in the Sinju-si, Chungcheongnam-si. The Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of sites for industrial facilities to purchase a total of 30,817,470,000 square meters of land within 18 lots

Article 4 (Settlement of Amount of Supply) (1) In the case of selling any objective site before completion of a creation project, the settlement shall be made on the basis of total project cost invested for the development of the project complex after completion approval.

(2) The defendant shall, with respect to the purpose land supplied prior to the completion of the project, receive the capital expenses from the month belonging to the date of concluding the contract to the date of completion of the project, and where he has received advance payments, the amount equivalent to the fixed deposit interest rate with one-year maturity in commercial banks from

Article 5 (Standards for Area, etc. and Settlement) The purpose site shall be settled at a reasonable unit price based on the total project cost invested, where there is an increase or decrease in the area of the cadastral record as a result of the adjustment of the cadastral record after the completion of the creation work or where there is an increase or decrease in project

C. On April 27, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for disclosure of information listed in the attached list pursuant to Article 8(1) of the former Official Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 7127 of Jan. 29, 2004; hereinafter “Act”). Accordingly, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision on May 18, 200 on the ground that the information listed in the attached list No. 1 and No. 1 and No. 2 falls under the information specified in Article 7(1)7 of the Act, and notified the Plaintiff thereof.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap1 to 10 evidence

2. The parties' assertion

(a) A skin;

The calculation method of land development cost is likely to seriously undermine the defendant's legitimate interests as public enterprises by significantly affecting the compensation price of the land, the sale price of the land, etc. if disclosed as matters concerning the defendant's trade secrets.

(b) Original height;

First, the calculation method of land development cost does not correspond to the matters related to the defendant's business secrets.

Second, according to the supply contract of the industrial facility site of this case, the supply price shall be settled based on the total project cost after the completion of the industrial complex, and the defendant has a contractual obligation to disclose the calculation details of

3. Relevant statutes;

former Official Information Disclosure Act (amended by Act No. 7127 of Jan. 29, 2004)

Article 2 (Definitions)

3. The term “public institution” means the State, local government, government-invested institution under Article 2 of the Framework Act on the Management of Government-Invested Institutions, or any other institution as prescribed by

Article 7 (Information Subject to Non-Disclosure)

(1) A public institution may choose not to disclose information falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

7. Information on business secrets of a corporation, organization, or individual, which, if disclosed, is deemed likely to seriously undermine the legitimate interests of the corporation, etc. (the short part omitted);

4. Determination

Even if the information listed in the attached list claimed by the Plaintiff constitutes “matters concerning business secrets” of the Defendant corporation for domestic affairs, the allegation that disclosure of the above information would seriously prejudice the legitimate interests of the Defendant corporation is difficult to accept in the following respect.

The defendant asserts that the development cost calculation is open to the public would have experienced a big difficulty in determining the purchase and supply price of the land. In the event that the defendant, as a government-invested institution, has a large profit in the settlement of accounts by implementing the land development project, the defendant will be subject to a lot of civil petitions claiming the purchase price of the land or the compensation price for the land from the props, and it would be subject to a demand from the buyer of the land to lower the supply price. Therefore, it can be easily anticipated that the defendant would suffer from inconvenience in rapidly and smoothly implementing the land development project.

However, examining the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Korea Land Corporation Act and the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor, the Defendant may enter into private contracts such as purchase, management, development and supply of land as a private economic entity, and in the case of public services, land can be acquired through the exercise of public authority, such as expropriation and use, and the supply price of land can be determined according to supply standards approved by the Minister of Construction and Transportation. Most of the profits of the Defendant corporation are deducted from the supply price of land. The acquisition price of land must be determined in accordance with the principle of market price and “justifiable compensation.” It is reasonable to view that the business cost is determined by the construction market and the labor market. The profit gained by the Defendant corporation is mainly caused by the change of natural environment, social and economic environment, such as change of land category, division or merger of land to be developed, which should ultimately be attributed to the entire nation.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s disclosure of the cost of creation is not likely to seriously undermine the Defendant’s legitimate interest due to the instant information disclosure, in comparison with the following: (a) ensuring transparency in the development cost calculation process by disclosing information on the part of the Defendant’s business promotion process; and (b) preventing harm caused by the abuse of administrative convenience, formism, and authority by a government-invested institution, thereby ensuring transparency in the development cost calculation process; and (c) preventing the harm caused by abuse of authority.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s grounds for internal tax credit constitute grounds for non-disclosure under Article 7(1)7 of the Act, and there is no other reason to refuse to disclose information. Thus, the instant non-disclosure disposition is unlawful.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kwon Soon-il (Presiding Judge)