(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.12.20 2017구단2329

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.12.20 2017구단2329

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On July 9, 2017: (a) around 05:11, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol by 0.151% (the result of the smoking measurement), and on the ground that the Plaintiff driven BM3 automobiles on the road before the summer 13-ro 12, Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Seoul, the Defendant issued the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s first-class large and ordinary car driver’s license (license number: C) as of September 2, 2017 by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on July 28, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 4 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion was made by the plaintiff while driving a motor vehicle on his/her own without a substitute engineer after drinking his/her friendship and alcohol from the military on the same day in the frequency of the day.

Considering the fact that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of a driver’s license has no traffic accident or no record of drinking driving for seven years, that there was no personal injury to others due to drinking driving at the time, and that the Plaintiff is currently engaged in the sales business (o) of the card company and the Taekwondo field driver (o) and that the driver’s license is essential, the instant disposition is in violation of the law that deviates from and abused the discretionary authority because it is too harsh to the Plaintiff.

B. Determination 1) Even if the revocation of a driver’s license on the ground of a drunk driving is an administrative agency’s discretionary act, in light of today’s mass means of transportation, and the situation where a driver’s license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by a drunk driving, and the suspicion of its consequences, etc., the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by a drunk driving should be emphasized, and the revocation of a driver’s license on the ground of a drunk driving should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party that would be suffered from the revocation of the license, unlike the revocation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da1548,

참조조문

-도로교통법 제93조 제1항 제1호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.01.10 2017구단2527

-수원지방법원 2018.02.07 2017구단2589

-수원지방법원 2017.11.08 2017구단1364

-수원지방법원 2016.02.03 2015구단3274

-수원지방법원 2018.01.10 2017구단2480