207Gudan2525 Revocation of the revocation of the driver's license

OOOOOO000)

Kim Jong-si

The Commissioner of the Gyeongnam-do Police Agency

Litigation Performers COO

January 15, 2008

February 12, 2008

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On August 9, 2007, the defendant who filed a claim shall revoke the disposition of suspension of driver's license for 110 days against the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 9, 2007, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary literature license on the ground that the Plaintiff driven an OOOOO-ho car under the influence of alcohol content 0.112% on October 00, 200, and the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Commissioner General of the Korean National Police Agency regarding the above disposition.

B. In an administrative trial on December 1, 2007, the Commissioner General of the Korean National Police Agency rendered a ruling to change the above disposition to the first-class ordinary license suspension for 110 days (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition that was changed to the disposition of driver’s license suspension by an adjudication”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Eul evidence 1

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion changed the direction of the vehicle for a person who satise a meeting with the Plaintiff’s driver, and did not drive the vehicle, and did not hold his own vehicle for the purpose of not driving under the influence of alcohol, and the Plaintiff is the most responsible for the livelihood of five families, including the child under long-term care while driving as a business. The instant disposition is excessively harsh and unlawful.

B. Determination

In full view of the fact that the call concentration exceeds the criteria for the main driving, and the circumstance alleged by the Plaintiff alone cannot be said to be that the instant disposition that was reduced to 110 days’ driver’s license by an adjudication is too harsh, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Emblor