beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the first instance is the same as the ground of the judgment of the first instance except for the Plaintiff’s determination as to the assertion added or emphasized by this court, and thus, citing this by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. In determining the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the following should also be taken into account: (a) the odometer is short; (b) the driving of a vehicle is impossible; (c) there has been serious difficulties in maintaining livelihood; (d) efforts have been made to prevent the recurrence of drinking alcohol; and (e) the risk has been disseminated; (c) the activity area has decreased while the instant lawsuit is pending, thereby hindering livelihood activities; and (d) the existing means of livelihood cannot be maintained any longer unless the license is recovered.
B. According to the mitigation criteria of Article 91(1) [Attachment 28] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Administrative Safety No. 217 of Dec. 10, 2020), the phrase “the person whose driving is subject to the revocation of a driver’s license due to drinking” under Article 91(1)(f)(a) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 217 of Dec. 10, 2020), “the person who is engaged in transportation service for at least three years as an exemplary driver, or who has received an official commendation of at least the head of a police station by arresting an escape driver who has caused a traffic accident,” the phrase “the person whose alcohol level in blood alcohol level exceeds 0.1%, during drinking, caused a traffic accident while driving under drinking,” and thus, the person’s family’s livelihood should be mitigated due to any significant means to reduce his/her family’s livelihood.