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 January 24, 2019, at around 00:40, the Plaintiff driven a B human Q30-car under the influence of alcohol level of 0.188%, and the Plaintiff driven a 10km Q30-meter car from the front of the Suwon-dong Epic Zone in Ansan-si to the front of the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.
B. On February 15, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.1% (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 April 9, 2019.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 16, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion does not cause any personal or material damage due to the plaintiff's drinking driving, the plaintiff's acquisition of the driver's license does not cause a traffic accident for about 17 years, or does not have any history of driving under the influence of alcohol, and the plaintiff is currently against and again is expected not to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the plaintiff is an educational business management position, and the plaintiff is working as an educational business management position. However, in light of the characteristics of the business, the management university in Daegu, Busan, and the management university in Busan should be inside the area, and more than half of the month is going to travel at a regional briefing session and resident employee training, and when the driver's license is revoked, the disposition in this case is erroneous in the law of abuse of discretionary power due to excessive suspicion to the plaintiff, and thus, the disposition in this case should be revoked.
B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the public interest and the purpose of the disposition in question.