beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On January 23, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition with respect to the Plaintiff on the ground that, around January 23, 2015, the Plaintiff driven a B car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.103% at the front of the entrance of the Sincheon-si, Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si at around January 9, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a B car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.103%.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff worked as a factory security guard in the presence of a disability with the bridge and the bridge, and therefore, the plaintiff must drive for commuting, the cancellation of the driver's license is no longer possible as security guards, and there is a situation that makes it difficult for them to work as other others under the circumstances with poor body, making it difficult for them to live, making it difficult to make their livelihood difficult, and the blood alcohol concentration exceeds the criteria for revocation of the license, and the blood alcohol concentration exceeds the criteria for revocation of the license, and it is against the depth of the drinking driving of this case. In full view of all circumstances, the disposition of this case constitutes
B. The need to strictly observe traffic regulations is increasing due to the rapid increase of motor vehicles today, the number of driver's licenses of motor vehicles is issued in large volume, so traffic conditions are complicated, and in particular, 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 serious. Therefore, the revocation of driver's licenses on the ground of drunk driving should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation, unlike the cancellation of ordinary beneficial administrative acts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17021, Dec. 27, 2007).