자동차운전면허취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Defendant issued the instant disposition, on September 16, 201, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a B car under the influence of alcohol on at least 0.06% on May 3, 2007, on two or more occasions, such as the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content at 0.06% and the Plaintiff’s driving under the influence of alcohol at 0.065% on May 28, 2008, on the grounds that the Plaintiff driven the B car under the influence of alcohol at 0.051% on September 2, 2014 and driven the ever three-time alcohol level on September 16, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 8 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s drinking alcohol level exceeded 0.05%, which is the control standard rule. Considering the possibility of remaining alcohol in the mouth by taking a drinking test within 10 minutes from the final drinking time, and the error of the drinking measuring apparatus, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff’s drinking alcohol level exceeds the control standard rule. (2) The Plaintiff is currently running a business and directly driving for business and delivery. When the driver’s license is revoked, it is impossible to operate the said business; (3) the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife are unable to operate the said business due to lack of health; (4) the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife are performing a large amount of volunteer activities in the ordinary local community; and (4) the instant disposition is a case where the Plaintiff excessively harshed to the Plaintiff and abused discretion.
B. 1) Determination No. 3 and No. 4 of the first argument (including a serial number, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s presentation by September 1, 2014 and 1:45 minutes after drinking alcohol from September 23:00.
2. At around 00 00:45, the police officer conducted a breath alcohol measurement at the end of the control, and the police officer used at the time of the control as the ALP-1 product from the date of control.