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 July 25, 2017, at around 19:20, the Plaintiff driven B Maccccccoo car volume while under the influence of alcohol by 0.145% at the front of the new base station in Jung-gu Seoul, Seoul (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).
B. On August 8, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class I, II, and II) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on September 21, 2017, but was dismissed on November 7, 2017.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 5 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion was made that he was unable to interfere with the request of a proxy officer for a considerable time on the day he returned to the Republic of Korea after the Plaintiff’s usual drinking, and was forced to operate directly, and that there was no personal injury due to the driving of the instant drinking, that the operation of the instant vehicle is essential due to a large number of external business trips in the duties of freezing and freezing equipment A/S business, and that there was an economic difficulty, the instant disposition exceeded the scope of discretion or abused discretionary power.
B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretion ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.
In such cases, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal administrative rules.