beta
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 November 7, 2016, at around 23:47, the Plaintiff driven D Coindo Purpose Vehicle in front of C in Heungdong-gu, Cheongju-si, with the influence of alcohol. The Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration is 0.120% as a result of the respiratory measurement, and 0.19% as a result of the blood collection test thereafter.
B. Accordingly, on December 15, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol content 0.19%.”
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, and 16 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. Unlike ordinary drinking, unlike the Plaintiff’s assertion of entertainment, the Plaintiff had an inevitable circumstance that the Plaintiff had a misunderstanding of village-driedness among the conversations with the village-dried people on the day of the instant case, and was making a drunk driving by failing to refuse to make any alcohol within the meaning of reconciliation, and the Plaintiff was driving a vehicle after drinking.
In light of the above legal principles, the plaintiff's act of collecting blood from the plaintiff, which caused the plaintiff's act of traffic accident and reported it to the police, and the police called the plaintiff. The plaintiff requested the plaintiff to collect blood from the plaintiff only because he requested the plaintiff to collect blood from the plaintiff, and the police did not have any knowledge or explanation about the intention of collecting blood from the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's act of violation of the law in the course of collecting blood is also illegal. The blood is about 200 meters away from the driving under the influence of alcohol, the plaintiff did not have any fact of being exposed to the driving under the influence of alcohol before, and there was no traffic violation that can receive the penalty.