logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2020.06.17 2020구단6146
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

On July 13, 2004, the Plaintiff refused to take a breath alcohol measurement, and operated under the influence of 0.051% of alcohol level on May 19, 2004.

On November 30, 2019, at around 08:57, the Plaintiff driven C-wing Vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.033% at the front of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

On January 4, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 large and class 1 common) pursuant to Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the person who refused to drive or to take a alcohol level again drive falling under the cause of suspension of driver’s license” against the Plaintiff.

On January 23, 2020, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on March 3, 2020.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the entire argument as to legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the traffic accident did not occur due to the plaintiff's assertion as to legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation into drinking driving, the plaintiff has been subject to normal judgment as to drinking level conducted by the company at the time of his work, the plaintiff was suspended from driving of this case, the plaintiff's driver's license as delivery employee is necessary, and driving is an important means to maintain his family's livelihood, etc., the disposition of this case is unlawful since it deviates from and abused the scope of discretion

Judgment

Article 93 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act provides that a person who drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or who fails to comply with a request for a alcohol measurement by a police officer and drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on the ground of suspension of the driver's license.

arrow