In December 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s failure to disclose documents relating to the ‘comfort women agreement’ issued by the Korean and Japanese governments was lawful.
The 3rd Department of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge Lee Heung-koo) filed a lawsuit against the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the 1st to annul the failure to disclose information by Attorney Ki-ho Song, a member of the Lawyers for Democratic. Association, requesting the disclosure of some of the documents discussed during the agreement on the comfort women issue between Korea and Japan, the appeals court confirmed the decision of the lower court in favor of the plaintiff.
Attorney Song filed a lawsuit in February 2016, demanding the disclosure of discussion documents discussing the issue of recognizing the coercion of Japanese military and government officials in the process of drafting a joint statement by the foreign ministers of Korea and Japan in 2014 -2015.
The first trial ruled in favor of the plaintiff, saying, “It is right to disclose the documents in order to ensure the public’s right to know and transparency in the administration of the state.”
However, the second trial ruled against the plaintiff, judging that the offense of national interest outweighed the benefit to be gained by disclosing the negotiation documents between the two countries. The second trial court said, “If the information is disclosed, not only will the relationship of diplomatic trust built between Korea and Japan be seriously damaged, but it may also cause a conflict of interest or tension in diplomatic relations between the two country.”
The Supreme Court also ruled that the part that Attorney Song requested to disclose information was subject to non-disclosure. The Supreme Court said, “If you look at the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s judgment is justified because there is no error such as a misunderstanding of legal principles.”
A Supreme Court official said, “We accepted the lower court’s ruling that the benefit of not disclosing details of diplomatic negotiations held in private outweighed the benefit of disclosing them.” It is meaningful that it has been confirmed. ,” he explained.
