logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.06.24 2020구단282
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

A. On August 24, 2019, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of 0.120% on August 24, 2019, driven C-car (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).

B. On September 11, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class driver’s license and first-class ordinary driver’s license on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal on November 23, 2019, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on January 7, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 1 through 15, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff's assertion that there is no human or material damage caused by the drinking driving of this case, the plaintiff's driving distance is short, the plaintiff has no history of causing traffic accident or driving under the influence of alcohol, the plaintiff's mistake is against the plaintiff, and the plaintiff will not drive under the influence of alcohol again, and actively cooperate in the investigation, and the plaintiff actively cooperates with the investigation, and the disposition of this case is unlawful because it exceeds the scope of discretionary power or abused discretionary power where it is difficult to maintain a livelihood when the driver's license is revoked.

Whether the instant disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the social norms, or whether the pertinent legal doctrine or punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the discretionary power, by objectively examining the content of the offense as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the relevant circumstances, etc., and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages that an individual would suffer from such disposition.

arrow