Information disclosure under the Framework Act on National Taxes and Information Disclosure Act, etc.

Even if a tax investigation is conducted under the proviso to inform a specific person, the result should not be provided for private purposes such as the remedy for the rights of the informant, and the provisions of the Information Disclosure Act can not be deemed to be included in the "Provisions of other Acts" under the Framework Act on National Taxes

Article 5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act

Article 81-10 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's disposition of non-disclosure of information against the plaintiff on March 13, 2008 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 25, 2003, the Plaintiff and ○ Enterprise Co.,, Ltd. (hereinafter “○○ Company”) contracted to perform the ○○○○○○-dong 27-○○○○-based multi-family housing (hereinafter “○○ Company”). After the public announcement, the ○ Company subcontracted the above public announcement in violation of the Framework Act on Construction Project, thereby taking the construction cost by defrauding the ○○ Company and making a fraudulent intent. After which the Plaintiff received double KRW 8,00,000, value-added tax and KRW 727,270 and KRW 1,090,901 were evaded, and the tax authority reported the ○ Company to the tax authority.

B. On November 12, 2007, in order to protect the Plaintiff’s property suffered enormous mental or material damage from the Defendant’s illegal and unfair business activities, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for disclosure of information disclosure that one of the audit results managed by the Defendant that one company supplied for the said construction work, and that the steel delivery discretion and amount should be disclosed.

C. On November 14, 2007, the Defendant notified the non-disclosure decision on the ground that the information requested by the Plaintiff was not information acquired and managed by the Defendant.

D. On March 4, 2008, the Plaintiff again requested the Defendant to disclose the details of the tax investigation on the subcontracted construction amount (hereinafter “information of this case”) made by the ○○ Company to another constructor on the grounds that the said new construction work was subcontracted to another constructor.

E. On March 13, 2007, the Defendant rendered a non-disclosure decision against the Plaintiff that the instant information cannot be disclosed pursuant to Article 9 of the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”) and Article 81-10 of the Framework Act on National Taxes (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1-3 1, 2-4, Eul evidence No. 1-3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The proviso of Article 81-10(1)5 of the Framework Act on National Taxes stipulates that a taxpayer’s tax information may be provided to the extent consistent with the purpose of its use, and the Plaintiff filed a request for disclosure of the instant information to protect the Plaintiff’s property pursuant to the proviso of Article 9(1)7(b) of the Information Disclosure Act, which falls under “the provisions of other Acts” under the proviso of Article 9(1)7(b) of the Information Disclosure Act. The Defendant, despite its duty to disclose the instant information within the reasonable scope of the Plaintiff’s legitimate purpose of use to accurately understand property losses incurred by, and the cost of, fraudulent construction works,

(b) Related statutes;

Article 5 of the Official Information Disclosure Act

Article 9 of the Official Information Disclosure Act;

Article 81-10 of the Official Information Disclosure Act;

C. Determination

The grounds for the instant disposition are that the instant information constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under the proviso of Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act, and thus, it is examined as to whether it constitutes such information.

The proviso of Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act provides that the information specified as confidential or confidential information as one of the information subject to non-disclosure by any other Act or any order delegated by any other Act, and Article 81-10(1) main text and (3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes stipulates that a tax official shall not provide or divulge data submitted by a taxpayer to fulfill a tax liability under other tax-related Acts, or use data acquired on duty for the purpose of imposing or collecting national taxes, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "tax information") for any purpose other than the original purpose, and where a taxpayer is requested to provide tax information in violation of the proviso of paragraph (1), he/she shall not use such information for the original purpose, and where the provision of tax information is requested, he/she shall not refuse such request. Provided, That the Plaintiff claims that the information subject to non-disclosure under subparagraph 5 includes "other provisions of other Acts".

First of all, according to the purport of the Plaintiff’s application for disclosure of information, the instant information contains data on taxes reported or paid to the tax authority with respect to subcontracting of a newly built multi-household house that the ○○ enterprise received from the Plaintiff. It is clear that the instant information constitutes “tax information prohibited from disclosure” under the main sentence of Article 81-10(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. According to the Plaintiff’s report, the circumstances in which a new investigation is conducted for a small enterprise by the Plaintiff can be seen as having been conducted by the Plaintiff’s information. However, even if a tax investigation commences for the public interest purpose of verifying the errors or omissions of the details of the taxpayer’s report and collecting taxation data and properly exercising taxation rights, it is not permissible to use the result for a private purpose, such as remedy

Next, as to whether the Information Disclosure Act is included in the provisions of other Acts, Article 81-10 (1) proviso 5 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the Information Disclosure Act grants, in principle, the right to request the disclosure of information held by public institutions regardless of the purpose and motive to guarantee the general public’s right to know, and exceptionally lists information subject to non-disclosure. Of these, the provision of information, which is prescribed as confidential or non-disclosure information by other Acts or orders delegated by other Acts, should be construed as limiting the general legal interests that meet the citizen’s right to know in light of the legislative purpose and nature of other Acts, if there is a special public-interest request to restrict the right to request non-disclosure under the relevant Acts.

Thus, even though other laws providing a certain information as a matter of non-disclosure allow the provision of information pursuant to the provisions of other Acts, it cannot be returned to the regulation by the general law of roads pursuant to the provisions of the special law, so the provisions of the Information Disclosure Act are not included in "the provisions of other Acts" under the proviso of Article 81-10 (1) 5 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that the instant information needs to be disclosed to the public in order to protect the Plaintiff’s property, and that it falls under the proviso of Article 9(1)7 (b) of the Information Disclosure Act. However, the instant disposition does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under the proviso of Article 9(1) proviso of the Information Disclosure Act and does not constitute information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1) proviso of the Information Disclosure Act. Thus, the instant

Therefore, the disposition of this case on the ground that the instant information is taxation information under Article 81-10(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, which constitutes information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act, is legitimate. The Plaintiff’s assertion

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.