자동차운전면허취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On August 27, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1) as of September 19, 2015 on the ground that “A Plaintiff was driving a IM-blue vehicle under the influence of alcohol at a level of 0.106% in the blood alcohol concentration on the front of the Sincheon-gu Dencheon-gu, Haak-do, Skhan-gun, not Skwan-do, on August 3, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
On October 26, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, and the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on December 1, 2015.
【Reasons for Recognition】 Entry of Evidence Nos. 1 and 16, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s body’s contact with the mother that the Plaintiff’s body is not good; and (b) the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is essential to engage in the repair business of agricultural machinery; and (c) the Plaintiff’s instant disposition is deemed unlawful.
B. In light of the frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today's judgment and the fact that the results are harsh, etc., the necessity of public interest to prevent the traffic accidents caused by drinking driving is very great (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu13214, Nov. 14, 1997). The Plaintiff's drinking level falls under the criteria for revocation of driver's license under Article 91(1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, and there is no special circumstance to deem that the disposition of this case is considerably unreasonable, and it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff had an inevitable circumstance to drive drinking, even if considering the various circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff, the public interest to achieve the disposition of this case is larger than the disadvantage the Plaintiff would suffer from the disposition of this case. Thus, the disposition of this case is taken in light of the following circumstances.