정보공개법상 비공개사유 ― 학교폭력대책자치위원회의 회의록의 공개여부 ―

Abstract

The case which this manuscript examined has such problems as follow; First it misinterprets the Offcial Information Disclosure Act Article 9(Information Subject to Non-Disclosure)(1)1. It thinks that the Article9(1)1 is applied if the information subject to non-disclosure is prescribed in other acts, especially which include the public servant's duty for keeping secret related to his business. But the public servant should keep the secret related to his business to keep state's secrets negatively, while the Official Information Disclosure System keeps the disclosure principle positively to protect the citizen's right. There are the differences between both systems. And so, we can see the case was judged based on the misinterpretation. Secondly we can point that the case employed the general and abstract standard in judging the non-disclosure on the Offcial Information Disclosure Act Article 9(Information Subject to Non-Disclosure)(1)5. But the Official Information Disclosure System has various values to protect and whether a committee's information is open or not depends on the characteristics of it which is opnionor fact. And we should mention one more problem about Article 9(Information Subject to Non-Disclosure)(1). That is, those clauses employ the term, fearfulnessas the standard to judge whether the information is open or not. It is time those clauses should be examined again.