Case Type: Administrative Litigation (Cancellation of Information Disclosure Refusal) 

Result: Plaintiff Victorious (Judgment for partial disclosure excluding personally identifiable information) 

Case Detail: 

The deceased, a primary school teacher at a Korean International School in China, passed away approximately one year after being appointed. While organizing the deceased's belongings, the bereaved family discovered records suggesting workplace harassment and filed a petition with the Ministry of Education (MOE). However, the MOE responded that there was no evidence confirming workplace harassment or abuse of power. To verify the specific grounds and investigation process, the family requested the disclosure of investigation reports and statements, but the MOE issued a non-disclosure decision citing the inclusion of personal information. After their objection and administrative appeal were both dismissed, the family retained our legal team to file an administrative lawsuit.

Our legal team filed a lawsuit to cancel the non-disclosure decision after reviewing its legal validity. Recognizing that the primary issue was whether the non-disclosure disposition was lawful rather than establishing the occurrence of harassment itself, we focused on demonstrating the practical necessity for the family to verify the grounds of the investigation. We chronologically organized digital records and memos from the deceased to establish this need. Furthermore, we argued that completely withholding documents for a closed investigation was unreasonable and that investigation records and statements should be partially disclosed by redacting personally identifiable information such as names, resident registration numbers, and contact details.

The Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, canceling the MOE's non-disclosure disposition except for the personally identifiable information of the parties involved. The court ruled that access to the records was necessary for the family to ascertain the truth and pursue legal remedies, and that maintaining non-disclosure was unjustified once the investigation was complete. The court also emphasized the importance of ensuring public trust in governmental investigative processes.

Case Inquiry: Attorney BAK, Sung uk