The amount of import evasion, investigation period and estimated tax amount of the reporter are all taxation information, and thus the disposition that the information non-disclosure decision is legitimate.

The amount of import evasion, investigation period, and estimated amount of tax on the basis of the data submitted by the reporting person constitutes both the tax information and the disposition that the reporting person decides to disclose the information is legitimate.

Article 81-13 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

revocation of revocation of information disclosure refusal by Suwon District Court 2014Guhap5167

Ansan 00

Deputy Director of Central Tax Office

November 5, 2014

December 17, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on November 26, 2013 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 15, 2013, the Plaintiff reported on May 15, 2013 that “A” corporation had paid the purchase price to the Defendant, but it was registered in the name of Han-A individual, the representative director of △△, a corporation, at KRW 2 billion.” On October 7, 2013, the Defendant used information on tax evasion to the Plaintiff for taxation, and the details of specific processing, such as the amount of additional tax imposed on the reporter, may not be disclosed pursuant to Article 9(1) of the Official Information Disclosure Act and Article 81-13 of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 12162, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter the same).

B. On November 18, 2013, the Plaintiff asked the Defendant about the existence of a report on tax evasion and a report on tax evasion.

The defendant made an inquiry to disclose the details of the investigation on the information on the tax evasion report and the details of the omission and taxation (hereinafter referred to as the "information of this case") to the defendant, and if there is no reward to be paid, the reason for the disclosure will be known.

(C) On November 26, 2013, the Defendant sent a reply to the effect that the instant information cannot be disclosed to the Plaintiff on the grounds that the details of individual taxation on the taxpayer are specified in accordance with Article 81-13 of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 9(1) of the Information Disclosure Act. ② The Defendant: (a) paid a monetary reward for tax evasion in the course of collecting taxes through tax evasion reports; (b) provided important information that is difficult for the National Tax Service to capture, such as transaction parties in the report on tax evasion; and (c) provided information that has already been made available to the National Tax Service or has no specific evidence; and (d) provided a monetary reward only if the amount of tax collected by the report on tax evasion exceeds KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 won; and (c) provided a reply to the effect that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant information is based on the information submitted by the Plaintiff, and it cannot be deemed that the information of this case is disclosed to the Plaintiff and is provided to another person under the main sentence of Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Furthermore, given that the information of this case is not disclosed to the public, the informant who received notification that there is no monetary reward as the Plaintiff would be obstructed the opportunity to receive judgment in compliance with the monetary reward payment standards, and that it goes against the legislative intent of promoting information and giving rewards and creating a good climate for tax payment, the provision of tax information to the tax evasion reporter cannot be deemed as being used for purposes other than the purpose prescribed in the main sentence of Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act provides that “Any information held and managed by a public institution shall be disclosed: Provided, That the information provided as confidential or nonpublic information pursuant to any other Act or any order (limited to the National Assembly Regulations, the Supreme Court Regulations, the Constitutional Court Regulations, the National Election Commission Regulations, the National Election Commission Regulations, Presidential Decree, and municipal ordinances) delegated by any other Act may not be disclosed.” The main sentence of Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that “Tax officials shall not provide or disclose data submitted by a taxpayer to fulfill a tax liability under the tax law or use data acquired in the course of business for any purpose other than its original purpose (hereinafter referred to as “tax information”).” As such, the purpose of the Framework Act on National Taxes is to prevent a taxpayer from providing or divulging tax information to any other person or using it for any purpose other than its original purpose, so it is reasonable to view the information provided as nonpublic information pursuant to other Acts (see Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act).

2) In the instant case, the following circumstances, known by the Health Team and by the above facts of recognition, namely:

① The details of the investigation and omission of the report on tax evasion requested by the Plaintiff are all data about individual taxpayers acquired by a tax official in the course of performing his/her duties related to taxation. As such, the information constitutes taxation information prohibited from disclosure under the main sentence of Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes; ② the Plaintiff cannot be deemed other person under the main sentence of Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes solely on the ground that the Plaintiff provided information on tax evasion; ③ each subparagraph of Article 81-13(1) proviso of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides exceptions to the provision of taxation information; ③ the use of the instant information for the purpose of verifying whether the Plaintiff falls under the criteria for payment of rewards as a tax evasion reporter; ④ If the Plaintiff requested the payment of rewards against the Defendant and the Defendant refused to do so, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have committed an unlawful act of disclosure of the instant information pursuant to Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act and Article 81-13(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.