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 August 12, 2017, at around 03:08, the Plaintiff is driving a D-car on the road located near the C Hospital located in Busan Seo-gu B.
After causing an accident that causes a shock of the E-cargo, the blood alcohol concentration was measured at 0.186% as a result of the alcohol measurement conducted in the Dongdaemun-gu District of Busan Western Police Station around 04:11 on the same day.
B. On September 6, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license for Class I common and Class II motor vehicles on the ground that “the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.186% with blood alcohol content” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 3-1-4, Eul evidence 4-1-2, Eul evidence 4-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion did not violate any significant laws and regulations for eight years after the Plaintiff acquired the driver’s license, the Plaintiff’s endeavored to avoid the ordinary drunk driving, the Plaintiff’s confessions the fact of drunk driving in a timely fashion and reflects its depth, and the Plaintiff’s work as a production position. The instant disposition should be revoked as an abuse of discretionary authority, in view of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion did not have violated the said laws and regulations for eight years; (b) the Plaintiff
B. Even if the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of a drunk driving is an administrative agency's discretionary act, in light of today's mass means of transportation and the situation where a driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by a drunk driving, and the severity of the result, etc., the need for public interest should be more emphasized. In the revocation of a driver's license, unlike the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act, it should be prevented rather than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation.