logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.08.31 2016구단7464
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On April 23, 2002, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol 0.132%, and the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol 0.13% on November 9, 2003, and was under the influence of alcohol her own on two occasions on two occasions. However, on December 6, 2015, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary vehicle (license number C) as of February 7, 2016 by applying the proviso of Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “the instant ground provision”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 3 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion was discovered during the process of driving a vehicle with approximately three meters away from the entrance of a parking lot in the plaintiff's vehicle while waiting for a substitute driver after drinking so as to stop the entrance of the building. The disposition of this case is subject to the grounds for revocation as follows.

1) The Plaintiff used the mouth 20 minutes after drinking alcohol, and conducted pulmonary measurement after using it. Since the Plaintiff’s alcohol level at the time of measuring alcohol level or the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at the time of measuring alcohol level is likely to have been measured due to the mouth mincation, the instant disposition based on the premise that the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at 0.052% is unlawful. (2) The instant disposition based on the instant ground provision stipulates that the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level at least two times regardless of the time of drinking alcohol level is illegal. The Plaintiff’s alcohol level is uniformly revoked. The Plaintiff’s alcohol level was 12 years prior to drinking alcohol level, and the Plaintiff’s work as the head of the materials management team at the construction company is likely to retire if the driver’s license is revoked.

arrow