beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On June 2, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license as of June 21, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol at a level of 0.135% in front of the Young Line Elementary School located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, at around 22:30 on May 12, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition
A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the driver's license is essential to make a living at the national site because he works for the construction of kn concrete, the driver's license is urgently required for his occupation, the driver's license at the time of this case was made in the process of rapidly moving after communicating that the patient's disease was above, and the previous time of this case had no record of driving under the influence of alcohol before this case, and the driver's license of this case is in profoundly against the needs of public interest. Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is against the disadvantage suffered by the plaintiff compared to the needs of public interest, and thus, it is unlawful
B. In today’s determination, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations due to the rapid increase of automobiles, the large number of driver’s licenses is growing, and traffic accidents caused by drunk driving are frequently frequently and the results are harsh, so the necessity for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving is very great. Therefore, the revocation of driver’s licenses on the grounds of drunk driving should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation, unlike the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17021, Dec. 27, 2007).