1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On May 21, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1, c) on June 23, 2014 against the Plaintiff on the ground that “Around April 27, 2014, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol at a level of 0.112% in blood alcohol concentration on the roads front of the distribution intersection of Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 23-ro 41, a new distribution intersection, and failed to comply with on-site relief measures or duty to report, even if the Plaintiff was making a traffic accident with a light alcohol level of 0.12%.”

(hereinafter “Disposition for Revocation of Driver’s License”). The Defendant informed the Plaintiff that the disqualified period of the Plaintiff’s license was from June 23, 2014 to June 22, 2019.

On July 21, 2014, the Plaintiff received a summary order of KRW 8 million due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicle), the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unclaimed Measures after Accidents), the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Finginginging Vehicle) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014 High Court Decision 14914), and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. Although the Defendant alleged the Plaintiff’s revocation of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license itself is reasonable, the revocation disposition of the driver’s license with the exclusion period of five years should be revoked, given that the Plaintiff’s revocation period of the driver’s license is an abuse of discretion in violation of the principle of proportionality, in light of the circumstances leading up to the driving of the Plaintiff and the traffic accident, the degree of violation of laws and regulations, the extent and degree of damage, the Plaintiff’s occupation and the degree of restitution, the disadvantage

B. The 5-year period during which the driver’s license is disqualified is legally effective pursuant to Article 82(2)3 of the Road Traffic Act, and the Defendant is not determined by an administrative disposition.

Busan High Court (Capwon) Decision 2012Nu1122 decided March 21, 2013, and Seoul High Court Decision 23 October 2012.