beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.12.07 2017구단1820

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. Around 05:50 on May 20, 2017, the Plaintiff holding a Class 1 driver’s license for large and ordinary vehicles and a large-scale driver’s license was driving B freight on the front road of the Norweg apartment in front of the Hanyang-si, Mayang-si, 0.146% under the influence of alcohol level 0.146%.

B. On June 9, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s first class large and ordinary, and large-scale driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on August 8, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 10 evidence, Eul's 1 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In full view of the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no personal injury due to driving under the influence of alcohol in this case, the driver’s license is essential, economic difficulties, and counter-influences, etc., the instant disposition is more unfavorable than the public interest to be gained due to the instant disposition, and thus, the instant disposition was deviates from and abused the discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. 1) Determination of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms should be made by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual as well as the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, as well as all the relevant circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000). If the disposition standards are prescribed by Presidential Decree or Ordinance, the disposition standards per se are not in conformity with the Constitution or Act, or are in line with the above disposition standards

참조조문