본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
대전지방법원 2019.08.22 2019구단100037

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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


1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 6, 2018, the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.149% at the front of B on the road in front of Jin-si, 19:40.

B. Accordingly, on October 18, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke a driver’s license (class 1 ordinary) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on November 19, 2018.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on December 11, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion and the fact that the driver’s license is essential as a self-employed person, and the family support and the maintenance of livelihood are difficult if the license is revoked, the instant disposition is excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby abusing or abusing the discretion.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the social norms shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the act of violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposition, and all the relevant circumstances. In this case, even if the criteria for the punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance of the Ministry, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the internal administrative affairs rules of the administrative agency, and it is not effective externally to the public or the court. The issue of whether the disposition is legitimate should be determined not only in accordance with

Although the disposition is not immediately legitimate, the disposition is not in itself consistent with the Constitution or the law, or a punitive administrative disposition according to the above disposition standard becomes the ground for the disposition.