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 June 23, 2017, at around 23:35, the Plaintiff driven a B-car under the influence of alcohol on the front of the Gu-U.S., the Gu-U.S., the Gu-U.S., and on the same day at around 23:45, the Plaintiff was measured as 0.127% of the blood alcohol content.
B. On July 18, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 large, class 1 large, class 1 large, and class 1 large towing) as of August 13, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but was dismissed by the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on September 26, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 31 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has no record of driving under the influence of alcohol during the pertinent case, and did not cause a traffic accident in this case. After normal drinking, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration does not exceed the standard level of revocation, and the Plaintiff’s license is essential to drive a motor vehicle due to the Plaintiff’s occupation, which makes it difficult for the Plaintiff and his family members to maintain their livelihood. Considering the disadvantage that the Plaintiff suffered due to the instant disposition and the above circumstances, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretionary authority.
B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the evidence presented in the first instance judgment, even if considering the degree of disadvantage suffered by the Plaintiff in the instant disposition and other various circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff, the public interest is more likely to be achieved than the disadvantage suffered by the Plaintiff in the instant disposition.
(1) Article 91 (1) of the Enforcement Rules of the Road Traffic Act.