logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.11.13 2020구단2650
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 31, 2006, the Plaintiff’s driver’s license was revoked due to the detection of drunk driving at the Incheon Yeonsu Police Station.

B. On May 28, 2020, at around 23:48, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.055% on the street in front of the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government sperm, and was discovered to police officers.

C. On June 17, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the first, first, first, first, first, first, first and second, second and second driver's licenses to the Plaintiff by applying Article 93 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving at least two times under influence of alcohol as above.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On June 25, 2020, the Plaintiff appealed to the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on July 24, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Considering the Plaintiff’s assertion of alcohol driving circumstances and overall circumstances, the instant disposition is unlawful as it excessively deviates from and abused the scope of discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. According to the above-mentioned laws and regulations, the defendant must cancel the driver's license for the plaintiff with the influence of drinking driving, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant has the discretion to choose whether to cancel the driver's license.

Therefore, the disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's above assertion, which is premised on the defendant's discretion, is without merit without further review.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow