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 March 26, 2019, at around 23:27, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.142%, driven B SP car from the parking lot of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the same GuD road. On March 26, 2019, the Plaintiff: (a) was driving a 2km car from the parking lot of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the same Gu; and (b) caused two persons, such as the victimized vehicle driver and the passenger, to suffer injury in need of approximately two weeks of treatment.
B. On May 9, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff had injured the Plaintiff due to a traffic accident while driving a drunk (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on July 16, 2019.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is relatively short of the distance from which the Plaintiff drives a drinking alcohol, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the driver’s license did not cause traffic accidents or drive under the influence of alcohol for about 11 years, and the Plaintiff is currently against and is expected not to drive under the influence of alcohol again. The Plaintiff is working in a company related to the construction interior, and the Plaintiff must respond to 7 sites of mixed person at the 2 and 3-day intervals, so it is impossible to perform its duties if the license is revoked, and thus it may be subject to layoff. In light of the fact that the driver’s license is essential in order to help the mixed mother and body of the married couple in the north-west side, the instant disposition in question should be revoked, as it is erroneous in the misapprehension of discretionary authority, because it is too harsh to the Plaintiff.
B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the ground for the disposition.