beta
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 31, 1990, the Plaintiff obtained Class II ordinary driver’s license (B), Class I ordinary driver’s license on January 4, 1995, Class I driver’s license on November 9, 199, and Class I driver’s license on November 9, 199. On July 5, 2014, the Plaintiff was subject to revocation of driver’s license due to driving under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.106%.
B. On October 31, 2017, at around 10:05, the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident while under the influence of alcohol from the front of the Saemaul market in the light-dong at the time of light lighting to the light-based Igion-dong (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”). At the time of the traffic accident, the blood alcohol concentration was measured to 0.102% at the time of the traffic accident at approximately 60 minutes after the traffic accident.
B. On November 20, 2017, the Defendant: (a) deemed the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol as zero point one hundred and one hundred per cent by applying the Badmark formula; and (b) issued a disposition revoking the driver’s license specified in Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on February 6, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4 and 5 evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 14, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is registered as “D” on February 1, 2010, and the lease deposit amount of KRW 8,80,000,000 is paid monthly and KRW 8,000,000, and the land is leased and run on the water market for collecting and selling scrap metal every day with 1.3 tons of cargo vehicles. As such, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level is essential for the maintenance of livelihood. The Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case is minor, as well as the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level is minor at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case, and then the Plaintiff took a place for