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 February 27, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (B), and around July 22:45, 2017, at the front of Pyeongtaek-si, 30 U.S. 2:45, the Plaintiff controlled C-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W
B. On August 10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) applied Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the drunk driving as stated in the preceding paragraph; and (b) revoked the driver’s license as stated in the preceding paragraph as of September 6, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on October 17, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 21-2, Eul evidence 1-14, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is erroneous in the misapprehension of discretionary authority in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s distance to and from work is 60 km, driving is essential for maintaining livelihood; (b) there is no traffic accident involving human and material injury; (c) blood alcohol concentration is relatively minor; (d) the principal and interest of school expenses should be borne by the spouse; and (e) the Plaintiff is engaged in usual donation activities.
B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the act of violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposal, and all the 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 internal rules for administrative affairs, and it is not effective externally to the public or the court.