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 July 30, 2020, around 22:30, the Plaintiff driven a DM car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.068% in the 8km section from the front of Yongsan-gu Seoul to the front of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu Seoul.
B. Meanwhile, on July 11, 2004, the Plaintiff was revoked his/her driver's license on the ground that he/she driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.111%.
(c)
On August 12, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Class 2 ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on August 12, 2020, on the ground that the Plaintiff had a history of driving under the influence of drinking (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
(d)
The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s administrative appeal on October 20, 2020.
[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The main drinking point of the plaintiff's assertion alone constitutes a ground for disposition of suspension of license; human and material damage caused by the plaintiff's driving of drinking did not occur; and the plaintiff's driving of driving after a considerable time after drinking could have been perceived as normal; the plaintiff has no record of violation of laws and regulations prior to the traffic accident of this case; and the plaintiff is currently against and again not driving of drinking.
In light of the fact that the driver's license is revoked when the driver's license is necessarily required due to the Plaintiff's occupational characteristics, the termination of the Plaintiff's home's livelihood is difficult. The instant disposition is too harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, it should be revoked.
B. Determination of the proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 93(1)2 of the same Act, and Article 2 of the Addenda (Law No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018) of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant legal provision”).