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 December 16, 1992, the Plaintiff acquired Class 2 ordinary car driving licenses, Class 1 ordinary car driving licenses on April 13, 1993, Class 1 special automobile driving licenses on May 6, 1993, Class 1 large automobile driving licenses (B) on September 13, 1994.
B. On October 17, 2015, at around 00:21, the Plaintiff driven a C Poter freight and was in front of the Yellow-gu restaurant located in the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Ulsan. The Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content measured around 00:31 on the same day was 0.115%.
C. On November 13, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke all of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground of the above drunk driving. The Plaintiff was notified of a summary order of KRW 3 million by Ulsan District Court 2015 High Court Decision 201Da2810 around October 26, 2015 on the ground that the above drunk driving was criminal facts.
On November 27, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, and the said commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on December 24, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 11, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although the Plaintiff’s actual drinking alcohol is limited to the degree of two half of the week in small alcohol, the Plaintiff’s actual drinking alcohol constitutes an increase in blood alcohol content due to the distance between the driving point and the blood alcohol concentration measurement point. Since the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content was high due to the side effects of the medicine that is imposed upon the Plaintiff’s usual consumption, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration by the pulmonary measurement method cannot be deemed to be the level of alcohol at the time of Plaintiff’s driving. Nevertheless, the instant disposition that revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is unlawful. 2) The Plaintiff’s license is engaged in the household delivery business, and the Plaintiff’s driving license is life.