Suwon District Court-2017-Guhap-69794 ( April 11, 2018)

Disposition Rejecting Information Disclosure

Documents, etc. submitted at the time of the business registration of the lessee who has requested the disclosure of information by the owner of the building can not be considered as falling under "where tax information is requested pursuant to other Acts.

The contents of the judgment are the same as attachment.

Article 81 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2018Nu42650 Revocation of Disposition Rejecting Information Disclosure

- Appellants

AA

Defendant, Appellant and Appellant

BB Director of the Tax Office

December 12, 2018

on October 16, 2010

1. Revocation of the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation part;

The dismissal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s refusal to disclose information on the information listed in the separate sheet against the Plaintiff on October 11, 2017

Pursuant to the result of non-disclosure inspection and examination of this Court, the plaintiff shall revoke the portion (the plaintiff shall be a list in the trial).

The information, such as the description, was specified in which disclosure was sought.

2. Purport of appeal

Plaintiff: The part of the judgment of the first instance court against the Plaintiff shall be revoked. The Defendant against the Plaintiff on October 11, 2017

disposition rejecting the disclosure of information as to the information listed in the separate sheet (as above the purport of the claim)

In the same way, the purport of appeal shall be deemed to be specified equally).

Defendant: Paragraph (1) of this Article.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the second floor No. 4 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”). CCC Co., Ltd. is a corporation whose place of business has completed business registration with the instant building as its place of business.

B. On September 28, 2017, the Plaintiff disclosed information to the Defendant under the Official Information Disclosure Act (hereinafter “Information Disclosure Act”).

Pursuant to Article 10(1) of the Act, a lessee,CC (00-00-0000)'s business registration certificate and related documents (lease contract, sub-lease agreement, etc.) have been requested to disclose the business registration certificate and related documents (lease agreement, sub-lease agreement, etc.).

C. On October 11, 2017, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to disclose the content of the Plaintiff’s request to the public.

Data (tax information) acquired on duty for the purpose of imposing or collecting national taxes provided for in Article 13 which are not disclosed to the public and shall not be disclosed to or used for any purpose other than the original purpose, and where the information for taxation of a taxpayer is disclosed, the relationship between the taxpayer and the tax office with the trust of the national tax administration

In addition, there is a risk of hindering the smooth implementation of the privacy of the parties and infringing the privacy of the parties.

In this regard, there was a disposition rejecting the disclosure of information under Article 9(1)1 and 6 of the Information Disclosure Act that "it shall make a decision not to disclose information pursuant to Article 13(4) of the Information Disclosure Act" (hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case").

D. In accordance with the result of this court’s non-disclosure inspection and examination, the Plaintiff specified the information in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant in relation to the business registration ofCC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant information at once”) as the information seeking disclosure.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant building, who has an interest in the lease of the instant building. Generally, the Plaintiff is the owner of the building, and pursuant to Article 4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act and Articles 3-2 and 3-3(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the Plaintiff may request the Defendant to peruse or provide the instant information, including the lessee’s personal information, in the form of an original contract in which the said information is written, and the Defendant may not refuse to reject such request without justifiable grounds. Even if the instant information contains any information likely to infringe on the privacy of an individual, or contains any non-disclosure information, only the information that could be disclosed should be disclosed separately. As the Defendant did not disclose all the instant information, the instant disposition should be revoked.

B. Determination

1) Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act provides that any information specified as confidential or confidential matters by other Acts may not be disclosed to the public. Article 81-13(1) main text of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 15220, Dec. 19, 2017; hereinafter the same) provides that “No tax official shall provide or divulge to any other person any data submitted by a taxpayer to fulfill his/her tax liability under tax laws or any data, etc. acquired in the course of performing his/her duties for assessment and collection of national taxes (hereinafter referred to as “tax information”) or use them for purposes other than originally intended purposes.” Article 9(1)1 of the same Act provides that, where tax officials may exceptionally provide tax information in violation of paragraphs (1) and (2), a tax official shall refuse such request upon receipt of a request for the provision of tax information. The legislative intent of Article 81-13 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes is to strictly limit the use of the tax information from a taxpayer for the purpose of imposing and collecting taxes, thereby restricting the duty to disclose of tax information under Article 13 of the Act.

2) However, business registration is a system required by the tax authorities to identify taxpayers for the efficient operation of the Value-Added Tax Act, facilitate their attitude and business contents, and make taxpayers enter tax code numbers in all relevant documents, and thereby promoting the fostering of taxation data, and is included in the business contents for taxation data, and data attached to the application for business registration constitutes taxation data.

3) Therefore, the instant information that the Plaintiff requested to disclose to the Defendant is, in principle, information subject to non-disclosure under Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act, as provided by Article 81-13(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes.

4) As to this, Article 81-13(1) proviso of the former Framework Act on National Taxes provides that a taxpayer may be provided with tax information within the scope that meets the purpose of use when a taxpayer requests tax information pursuant to the provisions of other Acts. The instant information constitutes information that may be requested to be disclosed pursuant to the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act and the Enforcement Decree thereof. In addition, Article 4(1) of the former Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Act No. 13284, May 13, 2015) provides that a person who has an interest in the lease of a building may request perusal or provision of the name, address, resident registration number, etc. of the lessor or lessee, and Article 4(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2637, Nov. 13, 2015) provides that “The inspection or provision of the registered matters, etc. under Article 4(1) of the Act, such as the inspection or provision of the report of business registration, etc., and the document attached to the document.

However, according to Article 4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Act No. 13284, May 13, 2015; Article 3-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26637, Nov. 13, 2015; Ordinance No. 854, Nov. 13, 2015; Ordinance No. 854, the scope of information that can be requested by interested parties who are parties to the lease agreement may include the personal information of the lessor and lessee, but the scope of information that can be requested by interested parties who are not parties to the lease agreement does not include the personal information of the lessor and lessee, and the provision of information on lease shall not include the personal information of the lessor and lessee,

The current status of the lease of a commercial building in attached Form 6 of this Rule shall be perused or delivered.

in the case of drawings: Provided, That in the case of drawings, the drawings submitted by the lessee shall be perused or copies thereof;

the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act at the time of the disposition of this case

information that the plaintiff may request for inspection or delivery pursuant to this Ordinance shall not be included in the drawings.

information, such as information, and documents, such as the lease contract itself, and not information within a certain scope;

Since it can only be done in the form of the current status of the commercial building lease, the plaintiff eventually can do so.

The instant information for which disclosure is requested shall not be deemed to fall under “where taxation information is requested pursuant to the provisions of other Acts”.

5) Therefore, the instant information is lawful inasmuch as it is taxation information under Article 81-13(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes where taxation information is requested pursuant to the provisions of other Acts and subordinate statutes, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the provision of taxation information is permissible. Thus, the instant disposition based on Article 9(1)1 of the Information Disclosure Act is lawful without need to determine whether it falls under Article 9(1)6

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and since the judgment of the court of first instance differs from this conclusion, the defendant's appeal is accepted, and the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant is revoked and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the cancellation part is dismissed. It