logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.29 2016구단852
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On December 9, 2015, the Defendant issued the instant disposition that the Plaintiff revoked the Plaintiff’s Class 1 and Class 1 ordinary car driver’s license (license number: D) as of January 19, 2016, by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on December 22, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a clateral car in front of the Yagu, Ansan-gu, Ansan-gu, the 0.10% alcohol content of alcohol.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, the whole purport of pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion was that the plaintiff returned home to the company's meeting place by using a substitute driving after drinking, but failed to find a parking place in the place near the house and was under the control of the drinking driving of this case. The plaintiff's drinking level exceeded the revocation standard, the plaintiff's drinking level exceeded a certain level, the plaintiff's drinking level may have an error in the case of a drinking measurement due to respiratory, and if blood measurement was conducted, the number may have been reduced. The plaintiff was recommended in the company due to this case, and the plaintiff was under the recommendation position in the company and is currently disabled in the grade 6 of the delayed disability, the disposition of this case constitutes an abuse of discretionary power against the plaintiff.

B. Even if the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking 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 drinking driving, and the seriousness of the result, etc., the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be emphasized, and the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of drinking driving is rather than the disadvantage of the party to whom the revocation would be suffered differently from the revocation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act.

arrow