자동차운전면허취소처분취소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On July 19, 2020, the Plaintiff driven B Poter Cargo Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.102% at the Dobong-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, 274, while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.102% on blood (hereinafter “driving of alcohol”).
B. On August 6, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 ordinary) as of September 9, 2020 pursuant to Articles 93(1)1 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act on the ground of the Plaintiff’s instant drinking driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 20, 2020.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff did not suffer damage due to driving of the instant drinking alcohol, the Plaintiff’s self-employed is engaged in the test-related business, and the driver’s license is essential in light of the characteristics of the Plaintiff’s business, and the Plaintiff’s family members are suffering from economic difficulties, etc., the Plaintiff’s disadvantage that is infringed compared to the public interest protected by the instant disposition is considerably excessive, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful by deviation and abuse of discretionary authority.
B. 1) Determination 1) In the event a person who has obtained a driver’s license drives a drinking, whether the driver’s license is revoked is an administrative agency’s discretionary act. However, in light of the increase of traffic accidents caused by driving under drinking and the cruelness of the result, the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by driving under drinking should be more serious. In the revocation of a driver’s license, unlike the revocation of a general beneficial administrative act, the general preventive aspect is more likely to prevent the revocation rather than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation.