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 August 26, 2017, at around 10:36, the Plaintiff driven the volume of Bsch Rexton car under the influence of alcohol by 0.123% at the front of the reservoir with a low blood alcohol level, located in the direction of the Incheon Strengthening-gun, Incheon, Incheon, (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).
B. On September 26, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common and class 2 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on October 18, 2017, but was dismissed on November 29, 2017.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 5 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion did not cause human and physical damage due to the pertinent drunk driving, the current job category related to food materials supply is identified, and the vehicle operation is essential and economic difficulties are experienced, etc., the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretion or abuse of discretion.
B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretion ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.
In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts, and the legality of the disposition is not only the above criteria for disposition, but also the relevant laws