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 April 24, 2014, from around 15:00 to about 17:00 of the same day, the Plaintiff dices alcoholic beverages as he/she, while taking meals with customers at a cafeteria located in the mutual unclaimed cafeteria located in the city of the captain of the Busan-gun, Busan-gun.
B. On April 24, 2014, around 21:58, the Plaintiff: (a) driven 7-person E-7 passenger cathoty disease (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) owned by C real estate located in the Busan metropolitan area B on the road; (b) was discovered to police officers who controlled drinking; and (c) was found to have conducted breathem alcohol concentration at the site of b2:02 on the same day, and was measured to 0.092% as a result of the breath alcohol concentration at the site of b
C. Before measuring the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at the place of control, FF notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff may demand blood collection, if the result of the pulmonary measuring instrument cannot be recognized after the pulmonary measuring instrument was conducted, and the Plaintiff refused to collect blood again once after the pulmonary measuring instrument.
Accordingly, the report on the circumstantial statement of the driver state, which was prepared in the situation where the driver had worked together at the site of drinking control, stated the Plaintiff’s speech and behavior as “rhythm” with “mhym” for the pedestrian state as “malm frame”, and “malmless red,” with “malming red,” and made the Plaintiff notify the Plaintiff that his driver’s license will be suspended, and that the Plaintiff did not want blood collection from the Plaintiff, and then signed and
E. On May 7, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license as of June 7, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff had driven a drinking car more than three times.
F. On May 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said administrative appeal on June 24, 2014.