beta
부산고등법원 2016.01.29 2014누22137

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff acquired a Class I ordinary driver's license on September 30, 1989, Class I special driver's license from the defendant on September 17, 2003, Class I driver's license from the defendant on September 22, 2003, and Class I driver's license on September 22, 2003.

B. On January 29, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) driven the car volume (hereinafter “instant vehicle”); (b) driven the car volume (hereinafter “instant vehicle”); (c) driven the two-lane road in front of the Southern-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, along with one lane of the second line of the road; (d) neglected to drive in front of the instant vehicle at the speed of about 20 km, while neglecting to drive in front of the instant vehicle at the speed of about 20 km; (b) led the lower portion of the D’s low-speed car volume, which was waiting in the signal at the front of the instant vehicle in front of the instant vehicle; (c) owing to the impact, the said low-speed vehicle was pushed in front of the instant vehicle in front of the said high-speed vehicle; and (d) continued to see the lower part of the said vehicle in front of the traffic signal at the speed of the front of the said vehicle in front of the said vehicle in front of the instant case; and (e) led to the treatment of the said H and the lower part of the instant vehicle in front.

(hereinafter “instant traffic accident”). C.

On March 11, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license for Class I large, Class I ordinary, and Class I special (Traler) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff caused the instant traffic accident while under the influence of alcohol level 0.095%.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 8, and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The time when the Plaintiff’s non-existence of grounds for disposition ends drinking is about 19:30, and the time when the instant traffic accident occurred is about 19:48, and about 20:40, the time when the alcohol level was measured, 70 minutes from the final drinking time.