beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.09.25 2019구단2576

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 15, 1998, the Plaintiff acquired a Class II ordinary driver’s license (B), No. 1 on November 28, 2008, and on March 26, 2019, at around 23:00, the Plaintiff suffered from 100 meters of the FF knife car volume in the state of under the influence of alcohol 0.121% from the street side of the D cafeteria in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, to the front day of the same Gu E-si, while under the influence of alcohol 0.121% of the blood alcohol level, while neglecting the duty of safe driving at the intersection, the Plaintiff neglected the duty of safe driving at the intersection, resulting in a traffic accident involving the victim H-5 vehicle in front of the left side side of the Plaintiff, resulting in the injury of the victim H, such as one day’s simple injury to the victim H, and two days’s knife-day, which requires treatment of the victim H.

B. On May 10, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the license stated in the preceding paragraph (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on July 9, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, 38, Eul evidence 1 to 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is relatively short of 60 meters of the driving distance in this case. The Plaintiff complied with the compliance driving without a long-term accident; the Plaintiff used his/her usual driving; the possibility of criticism and risk of the pertinent driving; the Plaintiff registered his/her blood donation and the donation of his/her he/sheed with the donation of his/her he/she, and the Plaintiff was receiving scholarship benefits by attending his/her study in good faith at university.