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 5, 2018, at around 23:38, the Plaintiff driven Bcoon’s vehicle volume under the influence of alcohol with 0.109% of alcohol level on the front of the Sucheon-si nuclear IC (hereinafter “instant drinking”).
B. On July 26, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class I ordinary) 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, 2018, but was dismissed on November 20, 2018.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 5 through 9, the purport of the whole entries and arguments
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, and that there was no personal injury due to the instant drunk driving, and considering all circumstances such as the fact that the Plaintiff’s operation as a constructor is essential, economic difficulty, and there are family members to support, the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretion or abuse of discretionary power.
B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the relevant administrative disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant administrative act, 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 it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts, and whether the pertinent disposition is legitimate or not.