logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.12.08 2016구단981
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. Around 00:20 on April 16, 2016, the Plaintiff holding a Class I general and Class II driver’s license was driving a road of approximately 7 km from the Nam-gu Namdongdong-dong-dong-gu to the vicinity of the exit exit in the real direction, with light height located in the Nam-gu Dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-gu, Gwangju, Gwangju, under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.118% of alcohol level.

B. On May 31, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary and Class II driver’s licenses on the ground of the above drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on August 23, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the revocation of the revocation of the second-class driver’s license is unlawful is that the instant disposition is related to a vehicle that can be driven with the first-class ordinary driver’s license, and it is necessary to treat the two-class driver’s license separately in the event that it is revoked because there is no common part with the second-class driver’s license that can drive the second-class driver’s license. Thus, the instant disposition based on a different premise is unlawful. (ii) The instant disposition is unlawful, although it is not possible to revoke the second-class driver’s license. (iii) the Plaintiff’s claim for deviation from and abuse of discretion is relatively minor storage near 0.10%, which is the criteria for the revocation of the license; (iv) there was no person travelling around the driver’s license; (v) there was no danger of traffic accident; (v) there is no person travelling around the driver’s license; and (v) there is any disadvantage more than the public interest that may be gained due to the instant disposition; and therefore, the instant disposition

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Determination 1 is amended by Act No. 13829 on January 27, 2016, as to the allegation of illegality of revocation of Class 2 driver's license.

arrow