beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.05 2018구단4513

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At around 00:50 on August 7, 2018, the Plaintiff driven a B rocketing car owned by himself/herself while under the influence of alcohol of 0.120%, and 200 meters from the front of the D in the Young-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, to the front of the Gu Mangyeong-gu, the same distance.

B. On August 31, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license stated in the purport of the claim against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.1% (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on October 30, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the plaintiff's assertion is that no personal or material damage has occurred due to the plaintiff's drunk driving, drinking volume is relatively minor, the plaintiff's self-driving will not drive under drinking again, and the plaintiff is in charge of maintenance and repair of the elevator. The plaintiff is in charge of the plaintiff's elevator maintenance and repair work. The plaintiff's vehicle's elevator management is more than 100 prices, and it is essential to drive the vehicle due to the relation that the plaintiff should have the tools or parts, and when the license is revoked, it is difficult to perform its duties and it is in the position that the plaintiff should cease to perform its duties. In light of the above, the disposition in this case should be revoked because the plaintiff'

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, or whether it constitutes an abuse of discretionary authority shall objectively deliberate on the content of the offense as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances complying with the disposition, and thereby infringe the public