beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.12.17 2015구단17173

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. On July 21, 2015, at around 00:05, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol 0.106% at the front of Pyeongtaek-si B, and was under the influence of alcohol 0.106%.

B. On August 21, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary driver’s license (D) on September 6, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was a drunk driver as stated in the preceding paragraph.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on October 2, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 11, 12 evidence, Eul 1 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On July 20, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that he would drink at the latest in the team ceremony.

After completing the jobs, the idea that he/she is required to drive a taxi to settle the expenses of the mother-friendly hospital on the following day was crackdownd while he/she found a gas station with the vehicle for the gas station.

The plaintiff is engaged in the construction business, so it is necessary to obtain a driver's license.

It is also necessary to grant a license to the mother for the protection of the flap cancer disease.

In full view of all the circumstances, the instant disposition was erroneous in the abuse of discretionary power.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. In light of the fact that the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking, such as drinking driving, etc. is an administrative agency's discretionary act, today's mass means of transportation and accordingly, the increase in traffic accidents caused by drinking driving and the result of the increase in the driver's license, etc., the necessity for public interest in preventing traffic accidents caused by drinking driving is very large. Thus, the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is different from the revocation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act.