[1] Requirements for an administrative disposition to become void as a matter of course and the criteria for its determination

[2] Whether it falls under a motor vehicle under the Automobile Management Act, which is towed by a Bosch Rexroth (affirmative)

[3] Criteria to distinguish between speed action and discretionary action

[4] In a case where a driver of a motor vehicle drives a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Motor Vehicle Management Act or which is not permitted to temporarily operate (except for a two-wheeled vehicle), whether the administrative agency should without fail revoke the driver's license (affirmative)

[5] Whether the driver's license of the driver can be revoked for Class I driver's license for large vehicles other than Class I driver's license for large vehicles and Class I driver's license for ordinary vehicles (negative)

[6] In the case of operating a vehicle with a Class I special license without being registered under the Automobile Management Act, whether the driver may revoke the Class II ordinary driver's license related to it (affirmative)

[1] In order for an administrative disposition to be deemed null and void as a matter of course, the mere fact that there is an illegality in the disposition is insufficient, and it should be objectively obvious that the defect is a serious violation of the important part of the law, and the purpose, meaning, function, etc. of the law should be considered as a purposeological and reasonable consideration of the specificity of the specific case itself.

[2] Article 2 subparag. 14 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001) defines automobiles as the premise of a vehicle driven by a motor. However, Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Automobile Management Act defines automobiles as a motor, in addition to instruments manufactured for the purpose of movement on land by an engine, it includes instruments manufactured for the purpose of movement on land by being towed and manufactured for the purpose of movement on land. Such definition of automobiles under the Automobile Management Act is also applicable to the determination of types of automobiles under Article 3 of the same Act, and Article 2 subparag. 2 [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act in the case of An automobile towed towed by a Bosch Rexroth.

[3] Whether a certain administrative disposition constitutes a binding act or discretionary act shall be determined in accordance with the form, system, or language of the law that served as the basis for the pertinent disposition.

[4] According to Article 78 (1) 11 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001), when a driver of a motor vehicle drives a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Motor Vehicle Management Act or which is not permitted to temporarily operate the motor vehicle (excluding a two-wheeled vehicle), the driver's license shall be revoked as necessary. Thus, in a case falling under the above legal provisions, it is clearly revealed that there is no room for discretion to decide whether to revoke the driver's license to the administrative agency. Thus, inasmuch as the driver of a motor vehicle satisfies the requirements for revoking the driver's license under the above legal provisions by driving a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Motor Vehicle Management Act or which is not permitted to temporarily operate the motor vehicle (excluding a two-wheeled vehicle), the administrative agency must revoke the driver's license without fail, and otherwise, it cannot exercise its discretion

[5] In principle, when one person obtains multiple kinds of driver's licenses and cancels or suspends it, it is different from each other. According to Article 26 and [Attachment 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, the first class driver's license for the first class of driver's license for the first class, but the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the first and the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license is not related to the first class driver's license for the first class driver's license for the second class driver's license for the reason that the first class driver's license for the first class driver's

[6] In principle, one person can not drive a motor vehicle with the second-class driver's license, which is the trend that only persons holding the first-class driver's license can drive. However, according to Article 26 [Attachment Table 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the first-class driver's license for the second-class driver's license for the second-class driver's license.

[1] Article 1 [General Administrative Disposition] Article 1 and Article 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [2] Article 2 subparagraph 14 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001), Article 2 subparagraph 1 and Article 3 of the Automobile Management Act, Article 2 (2) [Attachment Table 1] 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act / [3] Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [4] Article 78 (1) 11 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001), Article 27 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [5] Article 2 subparagraph 14 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 200), Article 2 subparagraph 14 of the Road Management Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001), Article 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act / [Article 16 subparag. 2 subparag. 16

[1] Supreme Court en banc Decision 94Nu4615 delivered on July 1, 1995 (Gong195Ha, 263), 94 delivered on August 2, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 394 delivered on February 9, 197), 96Nu4197 delivered on September 29, 197 (Gong1969, 1969, 197No9798 delivered on March 14, 197) 96Nu2979, 1999, 196Nu9797 delivered on May 29, 197 (Supreme Court Decision 96Nu9497 delivered on May 29, 197)

Hephoho (Law Firm Kimhae & World, Attorneys Yellow-hun et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

The Commissioner of the Gyeongnam-do Police Agency

1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. On April 18, 2001, the defendant revoked each disposition of revocation of Class I driver's license and Class I driver's license of May 9, 2001 against the plaintiff on May 18, 2001.

3. The plaintiff's remaining conjunctive claims are dismissed.

4. Two minutes of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder by the defendant.

The primary claim is the judgment that the defendant's revocation of the driver's license on May 9, 2001 against the plaintiff on April 18, 2001 is invalid.

Preliminary claim: the judgment that the defendant revoked the revocation of the driver's license on May 9, 2001 against the plaintiff on April 18, 2001.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings in the descriptions of Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 4-1, Eul evidence 5-2, Eul evidence 6, Eul evidence 6, 7, and 14.

(a) On March 10, 1997, the plaintiff acquired Class 2 ordinary licenses, Class 1 ordinary licenses on September 13, 1999, Class 1 large-scale licenses on July 15, 200, Class 1 large-scale licenses on October 9 of the same year.

B. On April 18, 2001, at around 05:45 on November 29, 2000, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff driven the automobile by towing it from the gardening industry located in the New Village of Changwon-si to the chiller located in the Gyeongdong to the Gyeongdong-dong at the Gyeongnam-si (hereinafter “the instant drilling”).

C. On May 15, 2001, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed an administrative appeal with the Commissioner General of the Korean National Police Agency on May 15, 2001, but was adjudicated to dismiss the claim on July 21 of

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff is around, pursuant to Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Automobile Management Act and Article 2 subparagraph 14 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 6392 of Jan. 26, 2001, hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), the term "motor vehicle" means a motor vehicle under Article 3 of the Automobile Management Act, which is a motor vehicle operated by a motor without a railroad or a temporarily installed line (any towed motor vehicle shall be deemed a part of a motor vehicle). The plaintiff's vehicle driving at the time is a motor vehicle towing the instant tea, and since it is not a motor vehicle of this case, the disposition of this case on the premise that the automobile of this case is a motor vehicle is a motor vehicle, its defect is grave and obvious.

B. Relevant statutes

Article 2 (14) of the Act provides that "motor vehicles" shall be operated by using motor (any towed motor vehicle shall be deemed part of a motor vehicle) without resorting to railroad tracks or installed lines, and the types of motor vehicles shall be motor vehicles under the provisions of Article 3 of the Automobile Management Act and construction machinery under the provisions of the proviso of Article 26 (1) of the Construction Machinery Management Act, and the driver's license (excluding driver's practice licenses; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) shall be excluded from motor vehicles under the provisions of Article 15 and the types of motor vehicles shall be prescribed by the provisions of Article 78 (1) and the driver's license shall be revoked or the driver's license shall be suspended within the limit of one year, and the driver's license shall be revoked for any motor vehicle falling under the provisions of subparagraphs 1 through 3, 5 through 8, 10 through 14, and the driver's license of the motor vehicles shall be revoked for any purpose other than towing motor vehicles under the provisions of Article 16 (1) and the driver's license of the two-wheeled motor vehicles shall be operated:

(c) Markets:

In order for the administrative disposition to be called null and void as a matter of course, it is insufficient to say that there is an illegal cause, and it should be objectively obvious that the defect is a serious violation of the important part of the law, and it is necessary to reasonably consider the purpose, meaning, function, etc. of the law and to reasonably consider the specificity of the specific case itself (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 95Nu8669 delivered on June 19, 197).

Therefore, the issue of whether there is a significant and obvious defect in the disposition of this case is stipulated as the premise of a vehicle being driven by a motor in defining an automobile under Article 2 subparag. 14 of the Automobile Management Act. However, in defining an automobile under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Automobile Management Act, it includes an instrument manufactured for the purpose of movement to the land by being towed other than an instrument manufactured for the purpose of movement to the land by an engine, which is manufactured for the purpose of movement to the land. It is also applicable to the determination of types of automobile under Article 3 of the Automobile Management Act. The definition of the automobile under the Automobile Management Act is also applicable to the specific type of automobile under Article 2(2) [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act as of February 2, 200, since it is based on the premise that the automobile of this case is a special type of automobile under the Automobile Management Act and the Automobile Management Act, it cannot be said that the disposition of this case was a defect in the construction of the automobile of this case, and the plaintiff's assertion that there is no serious and apparent reason.

3. Determination on the conjunctive claim

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff, preliminaryly, is included in the "automobile requiring registration under the law and the Automobile Management Act" of this case, even though the plaintiff is included in the "automobile requiring registration under the law and the Automobile Management Act" of this case, the defendant is a company transporting a large panel of 18 to 20 meters in length produced by Sam Young-gu Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yong Young-gu") which is working as an employee. Since the permitted length of cargo under the current law is merely 12 meters and it is only 12 meters and it is inevitable for the above large board to transport the cargo illegally, the above large board has no choice but to transport it with an illegal repair. The plaintiff, as a plaintiff, was operated under the direction of Sam Young-gu Transportation. If the plaintiff's driver's license is revoked, the plaintiff was in actual position and prevents his family's livelihood, so the disposition of this case is unlawful as it deviates from or abused from discretion and ② the plaintiff's driver's license of this case was operated by the plaintiff with the first class special driver's license of this case.

B. Determination as to whether or not the discretionary authority has been abused or abused

Whether a certain administrative disposition constitutes a binding act or discretionary act should be determined in accordance with the form, system, or language of the law that served as the basis of the pertinent disposition.

However, according to Article 78 (1) 11 of the Act, when a driver of a motor vehicle drives a motor vehicle which is not registered by the Automobile Management Act or which is not permitted by the temporary operation of a motor vehicle (excluding a two-wheeled vehicle), the driver's license should be revoked as necessary. Thus, in a case falling under this, it is clearly revealed that there is no room for discretion to determine whether to revoke the driver's license to the administrative agency.

If so, as seen earlier, the plaintiff driving a motor vehicle which is not registered under the Automobile Management Act or which is not permitted to temporarily operate (excluding a two-wheeled vehicle) and so long as the requirements for revoking the driver's license under the above legal provisions are met, the defendant must necessarily revoke the plaintiff's driver's license and may not exercise discretion otherwise. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion on this issue is without merit without further review.

C. Part concerning Class I driver's license and Class I driver's license

In principle, when one person obtains a multiple kinds of driver's licenses, the former shall be treated separately for the cancellation or suspension of the former. According to Article 26 and [Attachment Table 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act"), the first class of driver's license, which can be driven by the first class of driver's license, but can not be driven by the first class of driver's license, the first class of driver's license, and the first class driver's license, which is the first class of driver's license, are driving only by the first class of driver's license, and the first class driver's license and the first class driver's license are not related to the first class of driver's license.

Nevertheless, the Defendant’s revocation of the first-class driver’s license and the first-class driver’s license among the Plaintiff’s licenses cannot be deemed unlawful on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving unregistered automobiles.

D. Part concerning the second-class ordinary license

In principle, the driver's license of Class I driver's license can not be operated with a Class II driver's license, which is called a congested one in which only persons holding a Class I driver's license can drive. However, according to Article 26 [Attachment 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, the driver's license of Class I driver's license of a Class II driver's license includes the purpose of prohibiting the driver's license of a Class II driver's license of a Class II driver's license and the purpose of prohibiting the driver's license of a Class I driver's license of a Class II driver's license is naturally included in the purpose of prohibiting the driver's license of a Class II driver's license. Thus, the driver's license of a Class I driver's license of a Class II driver's license is related to one another. Thus, in case of a driver's license of a Class I driver's license of a Class I driver's license of a Class II driver's license without registration under the Motor Vehicle Management Act, the driver's license can be revoked even the Class II driver's license (see the above part).

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's main claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the part concerning the first-class large license and the first-class ordinary license among the plaintiff's conjunctive claims is justified, and each of them is accepted, and the remaining conjunctive claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Nam Yang-yang