logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.08.25 2019구단1118
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 November 3, 2006, the Plaintiff, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of 0.097% on November 3, 2006 and 0.076% on June 24, 2014, has the power of suspending two times a motor vehicle driver’s license in violation of the prohibition of drunk driving.

B. On December 19, 2018, the Plaintiff, while driving a B vehicle under the influence of alcohol on December 22:45, 2018, was discovered to police officers.

(hereinafter referred to as “drinking driving of this case”).

On December 19, 2018, the blood alcohol concentration of the pulmonary measurement result was 0.055%, and the blood alcohol concentration of the result of the appraisal request was 0.097% upon appeal by the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, on December 19, 2018, the Defendant deemed that “the Plaintiff driven a vehicle under the influence of alcohol of 0.097% with a blood alcohol content of 0.097%” and issued a notification of revocation of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common) on the ground of “driving on at least three occasions” by applying Article 93(1)2 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018; hereinafter the same) on January 16, 2019, by applying Article 93(1)2 of the former Road Traffic Act.

hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"

E. E. An administrative appeal filed by the Plaintiff against the instant disposition was dismissed on May 14, 2019. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 16 (including numbers), and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The non-existence of the grounds for disposition is that the Plaintiff drank 2 residues on the day of the instant drunk driving, the final drinking time is 22:00, the pulmonary drinking time is 22:53, and the blood collection time is 23:27. The pulmonary measurement (05%) from the final drinking city is 53 minutes, and the pulmonary measurement (0.097%) was 87 minutes, and the pulmonary measurement (0.097%) was conducted after the elapse of 87 minutes. The pulmonary measurement and the blood collection measurement constitute an increase in blood alcohol concentration (30 to 90 minutes after the final drinking. 2) so it is difficult to view the result as accurate; 2) the deviation or abuse of discretionary power.

arrow