(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.02.21 2019구단4190

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.02.21 2019구단4190

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 July 30, 2019, at around 23:50, the Plaintiff driven a Bntro vehicle with a 0.175% alcohol level, while under the influence of alcohol, and 100 meters from the front of E on the road in E-Road B to the front of E in the same manner as D.

B. On August 21, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the criteria for revoking the license.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on October 22, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the plaintiff's assertion was that no personal or material damage has occurred due to the plaintiff's drinking driving and the distance of the vehicle was short, the plaintiff's driver is going against and will not drive again, and the plaintiff is working at the logistics site. The plaintiff is obliged to drive the company's warehouse from time to time due to the characteristics of the business to visit the company's warehouse and load the company's number of employees, and the company from time to time to time to time to time when the license is cancelled by using public transportation. In addition, when considering the fact that the plaintiff should support his spouse and pay his liability, the disposition in this case is in violation of the law of abuse of discretion due to excessive abuse of discretion by the plaintiff, and thus the disposition in this case should be revoked.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, the substance of the offense as the ground for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.02.21 2019구단4190

-수원지방법원 2020.07.10 2020구단1845

-수원지방법원 2020.11.13 2020구단3476

-수원지방법원 2019.06.14 2019구단983

-수원지방법원 2020.07.03 2020구단1210