logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2021.03.03 2020구단1421
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

Details of the disposition

A. On August 18, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at around 00:20 on a blood alcohol level of 0.185%, driven a D-car on the roads of the Jinjin-gu C (hereinafter “driving of alcohol”).

B. On September 4, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class 1 driver’s license and Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving the instant drinking.

(c)

On September 18, 2020, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative adjudication on September 18, 2020, but the Central Administrative Adjudication Committee rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s administrative appeal on October 27, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 13, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 13, the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff's disposition of this case as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 13, and Eul, caused an accident that shocks the safety facilities installed on the road while driving the drinking of this case, but the physical damage is minor, the plaintiff's ordinary drinking quantity is measured, the plaintiff's high level of alcohol concentration is measured compared to the actual drinking quantity, and the plaintiff supports an old-parent who is not good health while engaging in the parcel delivery service. When the driver's license is revoked, the disposition of this case is unlawful because it is against the principle of proportionality and it is against discretionary power.

Whether the instant disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the relevant legal doctrine as to whether it exceeded the scope of discretionary power or abused discretionary power, the issue of whether the pertinent disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the social common sense shall be determined by objectively examining the content of the offense, the public interest achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto, etc., and by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages that an individual

arrow