2006Gudan881 Revocation of revocation of license for driving motor vehicles

○○ (OCOO)

1. Do-Eup Do-ri, Gyeong-nam, Gyeong-gun

Attorney Park Jong-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Law Firm 00, Attorney Kim 00

The Commissioner of the Gyeongnam-do Police Agency

Litigation Performers Kim00

on March 20, 2007

April 10, 2007

1. On February 27, 2006, the defendant revoked each disposition of revocation of Class I driver's license and Class I driver's license for the plaintiff on February 27, 2006.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. A half of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

On February 27, 2006, the revocation disposition on the revocation of the driver's license made by the Defendant against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

On February 27, 2006, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s first-class large driver’s license, first-class ordinary license, first-class license, first-class license, first-class license, and second-class ordinary license on the ground that the Plaintiff driven the Plaintiff’s non-registered scraper (hereinafter “instant scraper”) on January 3, 2006, by towing it to ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and second-class license.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) Since the plaintiff's revocation disposition of Class I driver's license for large vehicles and Class I driver's license for ordinary vehicles in this case's driving of the instant trailer is only a vehicle by the Class I driver's license for special vehicles in this case, the part revoking Class I driver's license for large vehicles and Class I driver's license for ordinary vehicles in this case

(2) Under the Road Traffic Act, even if the permitted length of loaded goods exceeds 12 meters, it can be operated with the permission of the chief of the competent police station. However, under the Rules on Motor Vehicle Safety, if the length of the vehicle exceeds 12 meters, it is impossible to register the vehicle, and in the case of a large structure, it is inevitable to transport it with an unlawful construction without any choice, even if the operating permission of the chief of the competent police station is obtained. The Plaintiff is merely a mere operator under the order of ○○ Special Development Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the Plaintiff is the sole means of living. The Plaintiff’s driver’s license of this case is revoked as the only means of living, and thus, the Plaintiff and his family members, such as the mother, etc., who are supported by the Plaintiff and his dependents, are prevented from living, without participating in the strike at the time of the distribution of cargo in 204, and the Plaintiff was abused or abused by the Defendant upon the Defendant’s request. Thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. Determination

(1) In principle, when a person who has issued a disposition of revocation of a Class I driver's license or Class I driver's license obtains multiple kinds of driver's license, it is considered to be separate from each other in the revocation or suspension. According to the "the type of a vehicle that can drive" of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act [Attachment 13-6], it is possible to drive by a Class I driver's license, but it is not possible to drive by a Class I driver's license, but by a Class I driver's license or Class I driver's license. Thus, the plaintiff's driving of a Class I driver's license or Class I driver's license of this case is not related to a Class I driver's license or Class I driver's license of this case, and it cannot be said that the purpose of revoking Class I driver's license or Class I driver's license of this case is included in the disposition of revocation of a Class I driver's license and Class I driver's license of ordinary motor vehicle.

(2) A deviation from or abuse of discretionary power

Whether an administrative disposition constitutes a binding act or discretionary act shall be determined in accordance with the legal form, system, or language that forms the basis of the pertinent disposition. According to Article 78 (1) 11 of the Road Traffic Act, in a case where a driver of a motor vehicle drives a motor vehicle not registered pursuant to the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Management Act, the driver's license should be revoked as necessary, and as long as the requirements for the revocation of the driver's license under the above provisions of the Road Traffic Act are satisfied, the defendant must revoke the pertinent driver's license and cannot exercise the discretion otherwise. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion on the premise that the plaintiff has a discretionary power is not proper.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the part concerning Class I driver's license for large vehicles and Class I driver's license for ordinary vehicles is justified, and the remaining part of the claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Emblor