logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.08.14 2019구단10178
자동차운전면허취소처분 취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On September 8, 2018, the Defendant acquired the instant driver’s license from the Plaintiff on April 1, 2017 following the revocation of the driver’s license on February 5, 2017 (from April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2018), Class I driver’s license on April 2, 2018, and Class I driver’s license on April 18, 2018 (total license; hereinafter “instant driver’s license”). However, according to Article 82(2)(1) of the Road Traffic Act, the Plaintiff could not obtain the driver’s license unless one year has elapsed from the date of violation of the driver’s license, on the ground that the instant driver’s license was revoked from April 1, 2017 to February 26, 2018 (hereinafter “the instant driver’s license”). The Plaintiff’s license was revoked as of June 26, 2017 to 2018 (hereinafter “the instant driver’s license”).

B. On October 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on December 18, 2018, the Plaintiff rendered a final judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s request.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 11, 12, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff acquired the driver's license of this case after the disqualified period of the driver's license, and was not sentenced to a fine or heavier punishment even if it was not discovered due to driving without a license at the time of

Therefore, the driver's license of this case cannot be revoked prior to the exemption period of the driver's license, even though the exemption period of the driver's license is applied to the subsequent period after being sentenced to a fine for driving without the license.

In addition, the plaintiff maintains his livelihood with the cargo transport business for 25 years, and is about the driverless driving of this case.

arrow