자동차운전면허취소처분취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. At around 00:20 on December 14, 2003, the Plaintiff driven under the influence of alcohol the alcohol content of 0.056%, 2.03:30 on April 26, 2008, 0.08% on blood alcohol content of 0.08% on October 1, 2008, and 3.2:0 on October 1, 2008, the Plaintiff driven under the influence of alcohol respectively.
B. On May 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) driven B 520 vehicles in the state of drinking 0.06% of blood alcohol content in front of the New East-dong, East-gu, East-gu, YYA on the ground that “The Defendant driven the third-class ordinary and second-class motor bicycle driver’s license (C) on June 28, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).” on the ground that “The Defendant driven the second-class and second-class motor bicycle driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 13-4, 7, and 8 of the evidence No. 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion has an exemplary driving experience, and a driver's license is essential to maintain family's livelihood while working as pipeline repair engineer.
In addition, the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act provides that the disposal shall be mitigated if the operator is a "important means to maintain the livelihood of his/her family."
In addition, the plaintiff was driving a motor vehicle at the time of drinking, but all the driver's licenses for Class I common and Class II motor vehicles cannot be revoked.
The instant disposition is an illegal disposition that deviates from and abused discretionary power.
B. According to Article 53 and attached Table 18 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, the holder of the first-class ordinary driver's license can drive a motor vehicle up to the motorcycle, so if a person drives a motor vehicle that can drive with the first-class ordinary driver's license, he/she may revoke the second-class ordinary driver's license
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Nu9672 delivered on November 25, 1994). In addition, according to the proviso of Article 93(1) and Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act is twice.