(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.07 2018구단3428

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.07 2018구단3428

자동차운전면허취소처분취소

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 December 11, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired a Class A driver’s license (B), and around 01:33 May 6, 2018, the Plaintiff driven a 700-meter driver’s license with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.182% from the place in which the Plaintiff was unable to drive his/her automobile at Sinung-dong to C at Sinung-si (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).

B. On June 30, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the license for driving under the preceding paragraph (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the instant drunk driving.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on August 14, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that he used the plaintiff's substitute driving of this case. The plaintiff was trying to use the substitute driving of this case. The possibility and risk of criticism for the plaintiff's drinking driving of this case was significantly low, the plaintiff has been exemplary driving without any particular accident for 11 years. The plaintiff did not cause a traffic accident through the drinking driving of this case. The plaintiff is directly in contact with E company's representative, and the plaintiff is directly in contact with his business and is obliged to drive approximately 100 to 120 km a day average. If the plaintiff does not drive a vehicle, the company's business ability and sales are reduced, and the vehicle driver's license is essential to maintain the livelihood of the plaintiff and its employees. The plaintiff actively cooperate with the investigation agency about the drinking driving of this case. The plaintiff supported his spouse for six months after his marriage and should provide economic assistance to his parent, and the plaintiff is making economic difficult to do so.

참조조문

-도로교통법 제93조 제1항 제1호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.02.05 2019구단4534

-수원지방법원 2018.05.02 2018구단30

-수원지방법원 2019.05.15 2019구단990

-수원지방법원 2019.05.15 2019구단228

-수원지방법원 2019.10.30 2019구단3111