logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원(창원) 2017.05.24 2017누10060
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant bears the total costs of the lawsuit after the filing of the appeal.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 26, 2012, the Plaintiff driven a B-car on October 26, 2012, and caused a traffic accident caused by the Gale Day while driving the Gale Underground Road located in Kimhae-si, and thereby, the Plaintiff and three winners suffered serious injury.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

After the instant accident, the Plaintiff sent the instant case to the Emergency Center of D Hospital without consciousness, and the police officer in charge, upon the Plaintiff’s mother’s consent on October 26, 2012, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s mother was unable to measure the respiratory level by drinking meters around 06:05, and thus, the Plaintiff had the nurse collect the Plaintiff’s blood (hereinafter “the instant blood collection”), and the police officer did not obtain a warrant ex post facto from the court.

C. As a result of the appraisal of the Plaintiff’s blood collected from the instant blood collection by the National Scientific Investigation Institute, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration was analyzed as 0.125%.

On March 6, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary driving license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on April 4, 2013, based on Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol 0.125% while under the influence of alcohol.

E. On September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed to the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on November 12, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 4 through 16, Eul's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was made without the Plaintiff’s consent or the court’s warrant, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful.

B. Determination of the Road Traffic Act not only provides for criminal punishment when a person drives a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (Article 148-2(2)), but also drives a motor vehicle while a person who has obtained a driver's license drives the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

arrow