logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.30 2016구단2346
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 March 23, 2016, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (license number: C) as of May 13, 2016, by applying Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act on April 15, 2016, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff, who was a distributor of Seocho-gu, Seoul New Distribution, was driving on the apartment front of the apartment, and was making a traffic accident (at least three drivers) involving the rear part of the taxi during the signal signalling atmosphere in front of the direction of proceeding; (b) the Plaintiff immediately stopped and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as providing relief to the victim.

B. On August 10, 2016, the Plaintiff was prosecuted for violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (dominant Vehicles) due to the foregoing criminal facts, and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year at the Seoul Eastern District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 2, Eul 4 through 9, Eul 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff, at the time, requested a substitute driver for drinking drinking alcohol with the person who was engaged in drinking alcohol, but he did not receive a substitute engineer, and therefore, the plaintiff went to a minor contact accident while driving a vehicle for parking. Since the plaintiff's acquisition of the driver's license, the plaintiff had been engaged in exemplary driving for about 20 years since he acquired the driver's license, completed the victim's recovery from damage by agreement with the victim of the accident, is currently a part of the day-of-day Kwikset Service, and the driver's license is essential, and the plaintiff's father is a person who has rendered distinguished services to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's spouse and two children should support the plaintiff, the disposition of this case is in violation of law by excessively harshing the plaintiff's discretion and abusing

(b) The importance of establishing sound and reasonable traffic order in modern society where one motor vehicle is a public and universal means of transport.

arrow