beta
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 October 30, 2019, at around 23:25, the Plaintiff, while driving a C vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.169% at the front of the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City B, and was discovered to police officers.
B. On November 8, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the first-class ordinary license by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under influence of alcohol as above.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.
On December 4, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on January 14, 2020.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 11, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. Considering that there is no damage caused by the Plaintiff’s alleged drunk driving, that the Plaintiff complies with and drives the law without an accident or force of drunk driving for 12 years after the Plaintiff acquired a driver’s license, that the police officer actively cooperateds in the investigation by the police officer, that the Plaintiff’s occupational characteristics, and that the driver’s license is essential due to difficulties in living, the instant disposition is in violation of the law that deviates from and abused discretion by excessively harshly treating the Plaintiff.
(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.
C. 1) Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms should be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages that an individual would suffer by the disposition by objectively examining the content of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the public interest achieved by the relevant disposition, as well as all the relevant circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000; 2000Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000).