The case holding that a certified public accountant's second examination does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure on grounds under Article 9 (1) 5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act.

The case holding that the second examination by a certified public accountant is not a problem bank type, but a new question is an examination for the method of preparing questions each year, and even if the examination questions are open to the public, it is reasonable to open the examination questions so that the fair performance of the examination affairs is ensured by correcting the questions, etc. through various gatherings and discussions, and even if the examination is already open to the public, even if the examination questions are already open to the public, the examination problems are considerably limited to the number of the examination questions to be open to the public, and the examination problems cannot be sufficiently prepared for the examination without sufficiently learning the whole problems, and their side effects are not high, on the grounds that the second examination by a certified public accountant do not constitute information which has considerable reasons to be recognized as significantly impeding the fair performance of the examination affairs, research and development of the examination affairs, and that the second examination by a certified public accountant do not constitute information subject to non-disclosure pursuant to Article 9 (1) 5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act.

Article 9(1)5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act

Maximum Jina

The Governor

November 8, 2005

1. The defendant's refusal to disclose the issue of the second certified public accountant examination against the plaintiff on July 18, 2005 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff applied for the 40th certified public accountant’s secondary examination (hereinafter “instant examination”) that took effect from June 29, 2005 to the next day.

B. On July 13, 2005, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant to disclose the issue of all subjects of the instant examination. However, on July 18, 2005, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition refusing to disclose the examination question on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Defendant may significantly impede the fair performance of the examination duties provided for in Article 9(1)5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act.

C. The examination of this case is a method for the members preparing questions selected by selecting members preparing questions each time instead of setting questions bank questions.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The parties' assertion

(1) Won high

In order to verify whether the issue of the examination of this case is similar to the examination of the mother of a specific university and to determine whether the issue of the examination of this case is set fairly, and even if all of the questions of the examination of this case are disclosed, it is unlawful as it infringes citizens' right to know and infringes on citizens' right to know.

(2) Sheetion;

If the examination of this case is disclosed, it may seriously interfere with the fair performance of the examination for the following reasons.

(A) Since the examination of this case is prepared to describe the process of solving the answers using the relevant official form and framework in accordance with the characteristics of the examination, the examination problem is bound to be a form similar to the examination of the mother of each university or the existing examination issue. Therefore, if the examination issue is disclosed, it is difficult to reconcil the examination problem because it becomes difficult to reconcilate the examination of a similar issue.

(B) In addition, when disclosing the examination questions, there is a high risk that the examiners may be criticized due to the examination errors and the preparation of similar questions, etc., which is subject to psychological pressure, and even if the examiners avoid the selection as members preparing questions or participate as members preparing questions, there is a concern that the fairness of the examination and the variability of the examination may be undermined by setting questions with low difficulty to escape from such criticism.

(C) From the standpoint of the examinee, there is a concern for neglecting a wide range of official books on the base of the weather problem.

B. Relevant statutes

Certified Public Accountant Act

Article 5 (Certified Public Accountants Examination)

(1) A certified public accountant examination (hereinafter referred to as "examination") shall be conducted by the Minister of Finance and Economy, and shall consist of a primary and secondary examination.

(2) The subjects of examinations and other matters necessary for examinations shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 52 (Delegation and Entrustment of Affairs)

(3) The Minister of Finance and Economy may entrust part of business concerning tests and the authority referred to in Article 30 (3) to the Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service established under the Act on the Establishment, etc. of Financial Supervisory Organizations (hereinafter referred to as the “Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service”) under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. In this case, when conducting inspection referred to in Article 30 (3), the Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service may collect inspection fees under the conditions as determined by

Certified Public Accountant Enforcement Decree

Article 2 (Subjects, Methods, etc. of Certified Public Accountants Examination)

(1) The subjects of a certified public accountant examination (hereinafter referred to as "examination") under Article 5 (2) of the Certified Public Accountant Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and marks of each subject are as shown in attached Tables 1 and 2.

(2) The primary examination shall be a multiple-choice test, and the secondary examination shall be an essay test.

(3) English subject among those of the preliminary examination as referred to in paragraph (1) shall be substituted by the results of the examination conducted by another examination agency (hereinafter referred to as "English examination") on or after January 1 of the year in which the date on which two years have passed retroactively from the announcement date of the examination falls.

(4) The types of English examinations referred to in paragraph (3) and scores required for passing the examination shall be as listed in attached Table 3, and any person who intends to apply for the examination shall submit a grade table issued by another examination institution, along with an application for the examination.

[Attachment 2] The second examination subject and each subject's allocation (related to Article 2 (1))

Financial Accounting 150 points

Cost Accounting 100 points

Accounting Audit of 100 points

Tax Act 100 points

Financial Management 100 points

secretary : Ascertainment of general theories and their application ability;

Article 38 (Entrustment of Business Affairs)

(6) Pursuant to Article 52 (3) of the Act, the following affairs among those concerning the examinations of the Minister of Finance and Economy under Article 5 of the Act shall be entrusted to the Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service under Article 30 (3) of the Act:

1. Issuance and receipt of applications for taking examinations;

2. Administration of examinations and ancillary services thereof.

Information Disclosure Act of Public Institutions

Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of this Act is to guarantee citizens' right to know and secure citizens' participation in state affairs and transparency in the management of state affairs by prescribing necessary matters concerning the request for disclosure of information held and managed by public institutions and the duty of disclosure of public institutions.

Article 3 (Principle of Disclosure of Information)

Information held and managed by public institutions shall be disclosed as prescribed by this Act.

Article 5 (Claimant for Information Disclosure)

(1) All citizens shall have the right to request the disclosure of information.

(2) Requests for disclosure of information by foreigners shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 9 (Information Subject to Non-Disclosure)

(1) Information held and managed by a public institution shall be subject to disclosure: Provided, That the following information may not be disclosed:

5. Information in the process of audit, supervision, inspection, test, regulation, tendering contract, technology development, personnel management, decision-making process, or internal review, etc., which, if disclosed, has reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure may significantly interfere with fair performance of duties or research and development;

(2) Where information falling under any subparagraph of paragraph (1) becomes unnecessary due to the lapse of a period, etc., a public institution shall disclose the relevant information to the public.

(c) Markets:

If the test price of this case is disclosed pursuant to Article 9(1)5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act, if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the disclosure of the test price of this case may seriously interfere with the fair performance, research, and development of duties, it may not be disclosed. However, it is reasonable to view that the defendant is responsible for submitting materials to support the disclosure of the test price of this case. Thus, the defendant's assertion of "reasonable grounds" is examined.

(1) Judgment on the Defendant’s first argument

The second examination of certified public accountant, including the examination of this case, is not an issue bank type, but an examination of the method of preparing questions each year by new examiners, and even if the examination questions are open to the public, it is not likely to seriously obstruct the preparation of examination questions.

In the case of other national examinations, such as judicial examinations, the examination is similar to the examination, even if the examination is disclosed, or even if the examination is completely repeated. However, unlike the case of other examinations, there is no evidence to recognize that the examination is practically impossible if the examination problem is disclosed due to its peculiarity, and there is no evidence to support that there is a significant obstacle that if there is another special circumstance, such as the examination is different from the examination problem or there is no possibility to create a new problem in a modified form, if the examination problem is open to the public, there is no possibility of creating a new problem in a modified form, which is different from the examination one.

Furthermore, it is doubtful whether there is a practical benefit of non-disclosure, such as the defendant's assertion, because the issue of rupture has been reconvened and distributed by the examinees.

Therefore, the first argument of the defendant is without merit.

(2) Judgment on the second argument by the defendant

The argument that the examination problem shall not be disclosed because it is highly likely to be criticized due to the error in setting questions, etc. is wrong in itself. Rather, it is reasonable to disclose the examination problem so that the fair performance of the examination work can be ensured by correcting such errors in setting questions through various opinions and discussions.

It is not an exceptional phenomenon that exists only in the certified public accountant examination, such as the possibility of criticism for the members preparing questions due to the setting of questions or similar problems, the challenge for the selection of members preparing questions, the difficulty in drawing questions to avoid the errors, etc.

Therefore, the second argument of the defendant is without merit.

(3) Judgment on the defendant's third argument

Even if a certified public accountant examination is made open to the public after 40 times or longer, the number of the examination questions to be made open to the public is so considerable that the examination questions are similar to the examination questions, or a modified one is re-established, the examination cannot be fully prepared without sufficiently learning the whole problems, and thus, the side effects cannot be deemed to be sufficient, and the possibility of preparing a new issue is not the examination questions, and the possibility of preparing a new issue is not the examination questions, so such side effects as claimed by the defendant cannot be seen to be likely to be likely.

Therefore, the defendant's third argument is without merit.

(4) As seen above, it is difficult to accept all the grounds for the Defendant’s argument that the examination issue of this case shall not be disclosed. Accordingly, the examination issue of this case cannot be deemed as information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act, since it is not recognized that there is considerable reason to recognize that the disclosure of the examination issue of this case may significantly interfere with the fair performance, research, and development of the examination.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Chang-suk (Presiding Judge)