logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.12.23 2019구단420
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. On June 28, 2001, the Plaintiff acquired a driver’s license (Class I ordinary) on June 28, 2001, and was discovered while driving under the influence of alcohol 0.07% on February 23, 2006. On January 14, 2007, the Plaintiff was discovered while driving under the influence of alcohol 0.080% on alcohol level. On February 23, 2007, the driver’s license was revoked with penalty points accumulated on February 23, 2007, and on March 31, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired a driver’s license (Class I ordinary).

B. On July 31, 2019, at around 22:53, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with approximately 100 meters at the 0.079% alcohol level on the front side of Dongbcheon-si, Dongbcheon-si (hereinafter “instant drunk driving”).

C. On August 21, 2019, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license on the ground of the instant drinking driving.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on September 6, 2019, but was dismissed on October 15.

[Identification Evidence: Evidence No. 1 to 4, Evidence No. 1 to 13]

2. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case was abused or abused discretion in light of the fact that there was no damage to the drinking driving of this case, active cooperation with the investigation, the fact that the driver's license is absolutely necessary, family support and economic difficulties, etc.

However, according to Articles 93(1)2 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, the Plaintiff has a history of driving under the influence of alcohol, and there is no room for discretion to choose whether to revoke the driver's license to the Defendant, who is the disposition authority, is the Defendant.

Therefore, the instant disposition is lawful and rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow