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 April 6, 2019, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol 00:29, 0.132% of blood alcohol level, was driving BMW 520i cars, from the area near the area of Suwon-si, to the road near the area of Suwon-si to the same Gu D, and was driving at 3 km from the area near the area of Suwon-si to the same Gu, thereby leading the damaged taxi driver.
B. On May 1, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff had injured the Plaintiff due to a traffic accident while driving a drunk (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 July 9, 2019.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 16 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is relatively short that the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident for about 19 years since the Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, or there was no power to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the distance from which the Plaintiff moves to a drinking driving again is contrary to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is currently operating an individual business entity related to mobile communications equipment. The Plaintiff is currently operating a private business entity related to mobile communications equipment, which has a large volume of mobile communications equipment and heavy weight and most of the companies should move to a vehicle, and they must go to the outside by up to 20 days per month, and when the license is revoked, the instant disposition should be revoked because it is too harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby abusing discretion.
B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the ground for the disposition.