Ruling on Disclosure of Yoon's Special Activities Funds Overturned; Supreme Court Cites Transfer to Presidential Archives

A civic group's victory in a lawsuit demanding the disclosure of former President Yoon Suk Yeol's movie-viewing expenses and the presidential office's special activities funds from 2023 has been overturned by the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of a remand.

The rationale is that the information in question has already been transferred to the Presidential Archives following an impeachment and early presidential election.

In June, the Supreme Court's Third Division (presiding Justice Noh Kyung-phil) overturned the lower court's partial ruling in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the Korea Taxpayers Association against the Chief of Staff to the President to cancel the refusal to disclose information, sending the case back to the Seoul High Court.

During the Yoon Suk Yeol administration in 2023, the Korea Taxpayers Association filed an information disclosure request demanding the release of details regarding the presidential office's special activities fund expenditures and business promotion expense executions.

They also demanded the disclosure of expenses incurred when former President Yoon reportedly spent 4.5 million won at a Korean restaurant in Gangnam, Seoul, on May 13, 2022, as well as the costs spent watching the movie 'Broker' with Kim Keonhee at a theater in Seoul on June 12 of that year.

The presidential office refused to disclose most of the information, and the Presidential Secretariat Administrative Appeals Commission also dismissed the administrative appeal request citing security concerns.

In the administrative lawsuit subsequently filed by the Taxpayers Association, the first and second instances ruled that parts of the movie-viewing expenses, the dinner costs, and some of the presidential office's special activities funds spent after the launch of the Yoon Suk Yeol government should be disclosed.

The request for business promotion expense details was dismissed on the grounds that they had already been made public.

The presidential office appealed following the appellate court ruling in April 2024.

However, the situation changed after former President Yoon was impeached in the wake of the December 3 martial law declaration, removed from office in April of last year, and Lee Jae-myung took office as president in June of that year.

The Supreme Court pointed out that the information in question may have already been transferred to the Presidential Archives as presidential records, meaning the presidential office no longer holds it.

It explained, "The information disclosure system is a system where public institutions disclose information they hold and manage in its current state. If the public institution does not hold or manage the information requested by the disclosure applicant, barring special circumstances, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation of a decision refusing to disclose that information."

The court's stance is that if the information requested by the Taxpayers Association has also been transferred to the Presidential Archives and no longer remains with the presidential office, the lawsuit lacks legal standing and should be dismissed.

The Supreme Court stated, "Due to circumstances arising after the conclusion of arguments in the lower (appellate) court, there is a need to freshly examine whether the plaintiff's legal interest in seeking the cancellation of the information disclosure refusal against the defendant has ceased to exist," sending the case back to the lower court to re-examine the portion ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

(Photo provided by the Presidential Office, Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.