자동차운전면허취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On August 3, 2019, the Defendant issued a revocation disposition of driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at around 23:12, around July 11, 2019, driven B car at a level of 0.212% alcohol level, to D in front of the Ulsan-gun C market in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Seoul.”
B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on August 27, 2019, but rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 15, 2019.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The instant disposition constitutes a deviation or abuse of discretionary power, considering the absence of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the fact that the Plaintiff has been driving without an accident for a long time, the fact that the Plaintiff has used the ordinary driving, and the fact that the driver’s license is essential.
B. (1) Determination is highly necessary for the public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of the frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today, and the results thereof are harsh, and when the driver's license is revoked on the ground of drinking driving, unlike the cancellation of the general beneficial administrative act, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the cancellation should be more emphasized.
(2) In this case, the Plaintiff’s drinking level is 0.212% of blood alcohol level, and the criteria for revocation of driver’s license under Article 91(1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the blood alcohol level is 0.08% or more), the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice to drive under the influence of alcohol do not peep, and the revocation of driver’s license is able to obtain a license again after the lapse of a certain period, and thus, the effect of sanctions is limited.