logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.04.10 2015구단138
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 July 16, 2002, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary car driving license (B), and was driven on and around October 28, 2014, while under the influence of alcohol at around 22:23% of the blood alcohol level on October 28, 2014, the Plaintiff was found to have driven approximately 70 meters in front of the 14th floor building in front of the ethth floor of the ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic eth

B. Accordingly, on November 12, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license pursuant to Articles 93(1)1 and 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 91(1) [Attachment 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under the influence of alcohol as above.

C. On November 13, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, but was dismissed on December 23, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 12

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful in light of the following: (a) although the Plaintiff intended to drive a substitute vehicle on behalf of the Plaintiff, it was merely 300 meters away from the conference place, and was forced to drive a substitute vehicle on his own without being allowed to do so at a short distance of 70 meters; (b) the Plaintiff was under the control of driving by driving 70 meters so far; (c) the Plaintiff has not been engaged in drinking for 12 years; and (d) the Plaintiff is obliged to operate a vehicle on behalf of the Plaintiff; and (e) the Plaintiff is under threat of livelihood if the driver’s license is revoked, the Defendant’s disposition of this case constitutes a case where the Defendant

B. The need to strictly observe traffic regulations according to the reduction of traffic conditions is increasing as the number of vehicles rapidly increase today and the number of driver's licenses are issued in large volume, and the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving is particularly more frequent and the results thereof are harsh.

arrow