logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.08.28 2020구단2497
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 March 6, 2020, at around 22:30, the Plaintiff driven a B-low-scale car under the influence of alcohol by 0.109%, and 5 km from the front of D real estate located in Pyeongtaek-si C to the front of Pyeongtaek-si E-ray.

B. On May 2, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Class II ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the base value for revocation of the license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on July 21, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident for about 25 years since the Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s driver’s license or has no record of driving under the influence of alcohol, the Plaintiff’s refusal to drive under the influence of alcohol again against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s use of flachising when the Plaintiff drinks, the Plaintiff’s use of flachising when flachising, and the Plaintiff is at the place where it is impossible to perform its duties if the driver’s license is revoked, making it possible for the Plaintiff to perform its duties. In light of the above, the instant disposition is so excessive that the Plaintiff abused and abused its discretion.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms or not shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the act of violation as the ground for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposal, and all relevant circumstances. In this case, the criteria for the punitive administrative disposition shall be

arrow