logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.15 2018구단1353
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 13, 2018, at around 01:44, the Plaintiff holding a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license: (a) operated a B-tem motor vehicle from the front side of the G-gu Northerndong apartment road to about 800 meters in front of the latter complex of the 53 U.S. Mau-ro 31-ro 53 U.S. Mari-ro 31-ri, e.g., the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol 0.157 percent of alcohol level.

B. On June 27, 2018, the Defendant notified the revocation of the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary driver’s license on the ground of the above drunk driving.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on August 14, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6 evidence, Eul's 1 through 6 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that an employee who completed the meeting of employees on the preceding day of the case and takes care of the plaintiff's office and inevitably drives the plaintiff due to the loss of the plaintiff's house, the driver was not involved in the accident due to the drinking driving of this case, and actively cooperates in investigation and reflects the depth of the investigation, since the driver's license was acquired, the plaintiff has been employed as an assistant nurse for 17 years since he acquired the driver's license, and the plaintiff is serving as an assistant nurse, and the two are both parents are in exchange with their parents, and there is more disadvantage than the public interest to be gained due to the disposition of this case, and thus, the disposition of this case is more unfavorable than the public interest to be abused due to the disposition of this case.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, objective is the content of the act of violation, which is the reason for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposition, and all other relevant circumstances

arrow