logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.15 2019구단990
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 October 9, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (B) and was subject to two dispositions of driver’s license on April 11, 2013 (0.092% of blood alcohol concentration) and on May 22, 2014 (0.094% of blood alcohol concentration) on two occasions. On December 17, 2018, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol from the street of the commercial building in C to the road before the E-real estate in C at E-owned at Sinsi (hereinafter “instant drinking”). On December 23:27, 2018, the Plaintiff driven approximately 50 meters of blood alcohol concentration while under the influence of alcohol (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On January 3, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the driver’s license stated in the preceding paragraph (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act due to the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on February 19, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff used a usual driving, and tried to use a substitute driving immediately before the driving of the instant drinking, and the possibility and risk of criticism for the driving of the instant drinking, as a member of G Co., Ltd., the plaintiff, as a member of G Co., Ltd., conducted the business of visiting a trader with the import of airport in order to supply the goods from the airport or to provide technical support, and the driver's license is essential because he/she must drive more than 100 km or 300 km per day, so the driver's license is essential. The plaintiff actively cooperates with and reflects with the investigative agency in relation to the driving of the instant drinking, the plaintiff must not help his/her parent with a thickness, and is economically difficult, such as cost of living and household liability, and the plaintiff is performing blood donation and volunteer service activities.

(b).

arrow