Examining the public officials’ speculation case
Supreme law judged as “secret until publicly disclosed”
Development information that causes land prices to rise is also a business secret
Whether the key is the information you have learned’in the process of doing business’

9th Gwangmyeong, Gyeonggi Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH) Gwangmyeong Siheung Business Headquarters. yunhap news
“Fastly find a way to redeem your unfair speculation profits.” This is an order issued by President Moon Jae-in at an internal meeting of the Blue House on the 12th in relation to the allegations of speculation in the 3rd new city by employees of the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH). Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Byun Chang-heum, who expressed his appreciation, said in the National Assembly’s National Land Transportation Committee pending report on the 9th, “There is a precedent that information obtained indirectly through public officials meetings is regarded as business secrets.” “He said. Minister Byun said that if the allegations of speculation by LH employees are found to be true, the unfair profits can be recovered according to precedent. On the 15th, a review of the cases of speculation by public officials using internal information under the Anti-Corruption Act revealed that the court is interpreting a wide range of’business secrets’. However, the key was whether the business secret was information obtained during’work processing’. Demonstrating work relevance seems to be the key to punishment and redemption.

Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Byun Chang-heum leaves the office prepared at the Jeongdong National Land Development Exhibition Center in Jung-gu, Seoul on the afternoon of the 12th. Senior reporter Kim Bong-gyu [email protected]
Is’new city designation information’ a secret?
The precedent regarded the business secrets stipulated in the Anti-Corruption Act as “all confidential until publicly disclosed.” Even if some information is known to the outside, if the specific plan is not known, it is a secret. In November 2006, the Supreme Court in Gyeonggi-do Gwacheon City Construction Division purchased blind paper near the planned road construction site based on prior information and saw a market price margin of 1.2 billion won. If known, it causes land prices to rise, so there is considerable benefit in not being known to the outside. “Unless there are special circumstances, all road opening plans and specific route plans are confidential under the Anti-Corruption Act until publicly disclosed.” It was fanciful. Even if it is not information that has been nailed as a legal secret, a development plan that has not been disclosed to the public is said to be a business secret. Mr. A insisted that it was not a secret, saying, “The road construction plan was promoted as a residents’ wishing project, and it was a fact that was disclosed to the residents.” The lower court dismissed Mr. A’s argument and imprisoned, saying, “It is true that the residents have suggested the establishment of the road, and the road construction plan was known to the outside through resident interviews, but the general public could not know the specific route plan other than the rough route.” In one year and six months, an additional surcharge of 730 million won was imposed. However, it was considered that the precedent was not a secret if the development plan was specifically known to the public. In July 2009, in a case in which a public official was charged with dumping on a road site in Dongducheon City using a business secret, the road construction project is a secret, but the fact that budget allocation and construction for the road opening project will be carried out in the Dongducheon City City Newspaper. In the case of this disclosure, it was considered that confidentiality was lost, saying, “(local government) publicly indicated that there is no intention to keep the above information confidential.” In this LH incident, the issue seems to be how specifically the development plan is known to the public.

Gwangmyeong·Siheung district area. <한겨레> Material photo
Did you acquire new city information during business processing?
Even if business secrets are widely interpreted, in order to punish public officials for the use of business secrets under the Anti-Corruption Act, business relevance must be considered. Article 7-2 of the Anti-Corruption Act stipulates that public officials must not acquire property using secrets they have learned “in the middle of business processing”. In March 2009, the Supreme Court stated, “Whether a public official or a third party’used’ the secrets learned during business processing in the process of acquiring real estate, the business that the public official was responsible for at the time of acquiring real estate, the motivation for acquiring real estate, and Various circumstances, such as the relationship between the public officials and the person who acquired the real estate, the relationship between the acquired real estate and the secrets learned during business processing, the fundraising of those who acquired the real estate in this case, and the degree of increase in the market price that occurred after the real estate acquisition in this case. It must be considered comprehensively and judged.” However, in the case of speculation that the court recognized as business relevance, the defendant had a close relationship with the business. It is known that the LH employees, who are currently suspected of speculation, are not in charge of designating the new city, and revealing how much information they were able to know about the designation of the new city in the course of work seems to be the core of the investigation. Previously, Gwacheon City Construction Department official A, who saw a market profit of 1.2 billion won, said, “I heard from other people and did not know the plan to open the road. It was reported at the daily business meeting of the construction department as a business,” said Mr. A, who was in the construction department. The suspicion of purchasing a new name for real estate by former Open Democratic Party lawmaker Son Hye-won is also representative. The reason why Rep. Sohn was sentenced to imprisonment at the first trial in August last year for acquiring information about the city’s’urban regeneration project plan’ in advance and making a second-name investment is because it was recognized that it was related to work as a member of the National Assembly. Summarizing the circumstances that Rep. Sohn had a meeting with the Mayor of Mokpo and heard an explanation of the urban regeneration project, it is Seoul that Rep. Sohn secured the data of the urban regeneration project in advance. It was the judgment of the Southern District Law.

In addition, the Democratic Party’s acting representative Kim Tae-yeon speaks at the Democratic Party’s Central Line Committee meeting held in the National Assembly on the morning of the 12th. yunhap news
Can I exchange it… Discussion of retroactive legislation
If the information on the new city is confidential and business relevance can be proved, it may be possible to confiscate or collect an employee accused of speculation of LH for up to 7 years or a fine of up to 70 million won, and the confiscation of speculation profits according to Article 86 of the Anti-Corruption Act. . The Supreme Court considered that the time when a crime in which a public official acquired property as a business secret is established is’when a property is bought’, and that a crime does not arise when a profit is realized by gaining a monopoly profit after a rise in the market price. Rep. Son also claimed that the purchase of a new name for Mokpo’s real estate was “for the purpose of protecting cultural properties” and that “there was no realization of profits”, but was confiscated. However, in the case of the LH case, it is pointed out that the business relevance is ambiguous, and there is also a discussion on retrospective legislation. In addition, the Democratic Party is pursuing a revision of the Special Public Housing Act to punish those who take advantage of undisclosed information regardless of business relevance. Legislation) is also known to be under consideration. By Shin Min-jeong, staff reporter