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 May 25, 2018, at around 00:56, the Plaintiff driven C Motor Vehicle from the vicinity of the Goyang-si Mayang-si to B in the front of Priju-si while under the influence of alcohol by 0.238%.
B. Accordingly, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke a driver’s license (class 1 ordinary) against the Plaintiff on the date stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal within a legitimate period, but was dismissed.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion did not cause any personal and material damage due to the instant driving, the inevitable driving of the Plaintiff’s occupation, the circumstances leading to the Plaintiff’s drunk driving, the Plaintiff’s profoundly reflects the Plaintiff’s drinking driving, the difficulty in living, and the fact that the instant disposition is going to marriage, it is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretionary power.
B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms should be determined by objectively examining the content of the offense, which is the grounds for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances complying therewith, etc., and by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages to be inflicted on an individual (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000). If a disposition standard is prescribed by Presidential Decree or Ordinance of the Ministry, the disposition standard does not in itself conform with the Constitution or laws, or if there is no reasonable ground to believe that the punitive administrative disposition in accordance with the above disposition standard is considerably unfair in light of the content of the offense, and the content and purport of the relevant statutes, it shall not be readily determined that the disposition deviates from the scope of discretion or abused discretion