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 December 23, 2014, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content was 0.065% as a result of the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content measurement conducted at around 21:49 on the same elementary school located in the same school located in the Daegu Water Zone (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Water Zone”). The Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content was 0.065%.
B. On December 23, 2014, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration was 0.194% as a result of the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration collected and appraised at the D Hospital located in Daegu hydro-gu C at around 22:29.29.
C. On January 21, 2015, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common) as of February 24, 2015 on the basis of the result of appraisal by blood gathering.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The blood alcohol concentration (0.194%) measured by blood alcohol collection without the ground for disposition is more than three times more than the blood alcohol concentration measured by the initial repulmonary measurement method (0.065%) and the defendant's disposition based on this ground is unlawful since it is doubtful that the credibility of the result of blood collection measurement is doubtful due to excessive weighting. 2) The plaintiff is in charge of the duty of compensation in the insurance company, and it is essential for the plaintiff to drive a motor vehicle. If the driver's license is revoked, it is inevitable to have the workplace, and it is against the duty of driving in this case, and there is no history of drinking or special violation of laws and regulations for 10 years prior to the control of this case. In light of the above, the disposition of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of discretionary power by excessively harshing to the plaintiff.
B. "Measurement" as referred to in Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, which determines the existence of the grounds for disposition 1, means of blood collection, etc. with the consent of the driver dissatisfied with the result of measurement.