A court ruling has been made that the attorney fees used in the constitutional complaint case filed by the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution regarding the legislative process and content of the so-called 'Geomsu Wanbak' amendment law must be disclosed.
According to the legal community on the 21st, the Administrative Division 5 of the Seoul Administrative Court ruled partially in favor of Mr. A in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A against the Minister of Justice to cancel the refusal of information disclosure. The court canceled the Ministry of Justice's refusal to disclose information only regarding the attorney fees among the information requested by Mr. A.
The court stated, "The attorney fees paid by the defendant (Ministry of Justice) for the related trial are paid from the government budget, so it is necessary to disclose the specific amount to achieve the public interest of guaranteeing the people's right to know and ensuring transparency in budget execution," adding, "Even if the fees are disclosed, there is no significant risk of harming the legitimate interests of the corporations or others who received the payment." Furthermore, the court added, "Among various expenses used in the related trial, at least the part concerning attorney fees does not fall under information subject to non-disclosure, so the refusal to disclose this part is illegal and must be canceled."
In 2022, the so-called 'Geomsu Wanbak' related laws, including the Prosecutors' Office Act and the Criminal Procedure Act, were passed in the National Assembly led by the Democratic Party of Korea. In response, last year, Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon and six prosecutors filed a constitutional complaint, arguing that the legislative process and content of the amended law hindered the proper functioning of prosecutors' investigation and prosecution functions. However, the Constitutional Court dismissed the case on March 23 of last year.
Subsequently, Mr. A and Ha Seung-su, co-representative of the organization Tax Thieves Catcher, filed an information disclosure request against the Ministry of Justice for ▲ the total amount and detailed breakdown of expenses used in the trial ▲ the law firm and attorneys of the appointed lawyers ▲ the law firm contract (excluding personal information) ▲ the list of responsible public officials.
The Ministry of Justice refused to disclose the information, stating, "It is a trade secret of corporations and falls under information subject to non-disclosure."
However, the court pointed out, "The related trial was filed by the defendant, a state agency, against another state agency, the National Assembly, claiming infringement of authority between state agencies, and thus belongs to a more public domain than any other case," adding, "The information in this case concerns attorney fees paid for the related trial, and the state's financial actions arising from this process are naturally based on taxes voluntarily borne by the people." The court further stated, "The defendant, a state agency, has the obligation to maintain sufficient legitimacy and transparency to convince the taxpayers, who are the actual spenders of these costs, when executing these expenses in the course of performing its duties," and concluded, "Disclosing this information satisfies the people's right to know and greatly contributes to achieving the public interest of ensuring the appropriateness of related budget execution."
However, since the Ministry of Justice has appealed this administrative court ruling, the judgment of the Seoul High Court is awaited.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
