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 April 29, 2017, at around 23:40, the Plaintiff driven a C-car while under the influence of alcohol in front of the Gumi-si B, and on the same day at around 00:02, the Plaintiff was measured with blood alcohol content at 0.125%.
B. On May 15, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking a driver’s license (Class I ordinary and Class II motor vehicles) on June 14, 2017 against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol as above (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but was dismissed by the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on July 11, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4 through 6, Eul evidence 1 to 9 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has no history of causing a traffic accident or driving under the influence of alcohol since the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the driver’s license, and no traffic accident has occurred on the enforcement day, and the Plaintiff’s vocational driving is essential and the Plaintiff’s revocation of the driver’s license is difficult to maintain livelihood. Considering the disadvantages the Plaintiff suffers and the above circumstances, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.
B. 1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire evidence presented in the first instance, the public interest is more likely to be achieved than the disadvantage that the Plaintiff would suffer, even if considering the degree of disadvantage suffered by the Plaintiff and other various circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff, to the extent that the instant disposition was taken into account. ① Article 91(1) [Attachment 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act
2. When a person drives a vehicle in a drunken condition (not less than 0.1 percent of alcohol content in blood), the individual criteria for revocation shall be revoked.