[자동차운전면허정지처분취소][공1988.7.1.(827),1000]
Whether there is a legal interest in seeking the revocation of the suspension of driver's license whose license suspension period has expired on the basis of a driver's license to be disadvantaged in the future under Article 53 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic
Article 53 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the Ministry of Home Affairs No. 440 of May 1, 1986) provides that the administrative agency is merely an internal administrative guidelines with the nature of an administrative order that provides for the criteria and methods for the revocation of a driver's license and the suspension of a driver's license. Thus, the above rules provide that the disposition of suspension of a driver's license shall be an aggravated requirement for the same kind of sanctions that may be received by the driver of a driver's license who is subject to such disposition in the future, and that the above disposition of suspension of a driver's license may be subject to aggravated sanctions pursuant to this provision in the future, even if it is in fact disadvantageous to the driver of a driver's license, the above disadvantage shall not be deemed a legal disadvantage. Accordingly, since the suspension period prescribed in the above disposition of suspension of a driver's license
Article 53 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (Act No. 440 of May 1, 1986), Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Supreme Court Decision 81Nu243 delivered on March 23, 1982, 82Nu301 delivered on September 13, 1983, 82Nu551 delivered on February 28, 1984, 83Nu535 delivered on July 24, 1984
Plaintiff
The Chief of Daegu Northern Police Station
Daegu High Court Decision 86Gu348 delivered on August 26, 1987
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, although the defendant ordered the plaintiff to suspend the validity of the driver's license for 110 days from October 10, 1986 to 110 days, the execution of the disposition has been terminated after the lapse of the period of suspension of the license specified in the disposition at the time of the conclusion of pleadings at the court below, barring any special circumstances, the plaintiff has no legal interest in seeking the cancellation of the disposition. Meanwhile, the plaintiff was subject to the disposition of the penalty points 110 points from the defendant pursuant to the "Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act" in addition to the above disposition of suspension of the driver's license in addition to the above disposition of suspension of the license, even if the minor accident occurred and the accumulated points of the penalty exceeds 121 points, the plaintiff is at the risk of cancellation of the license. Thus, even if the above suspension period has exceeded the above suspension period, the plaintiff's assertion that there is a benefit in lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the driver's license after the revocation of the driver's license.
In this case, according to the above Rule, Article 53 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the Ministry of Home Affairs No. 440 of May 1, 1986), Article 53 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the Ministry of Home Affairs No. 440 of the Ministry of Home Affairs), the above Rule provides that the penalty points or the annual aggregate score due to one-time violation shall be at least 121 points per year, at least 201 points per year, at least 201 points, and at least 271 points per 3 years, the driver's license shall be revoked if the person who has received the disposition of license during the period of 10 months in question under item (d) (3) of the same subparagraph shall be subject to the disposition of suspension of license, at least 30 days at least twice of the disposition of suspension of license, and at least 3 90 days shall be added to the number of days of execution of the disposition of suspension of license under the Act, which shall not be subject to the above provision of suspension of business, etc.
The court below's decision to the same effect that the plaintiff's revocation of the disposition of this case's driver's license is illegal and without any need to enter the principal case's determination, and thus dismissed the lawsuit of this case without any legal interest to seek its revocation, is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interest of lawsuit in the administrative
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)