beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On June 25, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 large, Class 1 ordinary) as of August 5, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol of 0.181% of blood alcohol level on the front of the Il-dong, Dong-dong apartment, Seodong-dong, Chungcheongnam-si, Kim Jong-si (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on July 5, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving a Bho-do motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.1%.
On July 18, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, and the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on August 31, 2017.
[Reasons for Recognition] Entry No. 1 of Eul and the purport of the whole pleading
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. In order for the Plaintiff’s assertion to be able to maintain his family’s livelihood by continuing the establishment of the Plaintiff’s available seaway and the operation of the AS business, the instant disposition was unlawful since it was excessively harsh and abused discretion.
B. In light of the following: (a) traffic accidents caused by drunk driving are frequent and the result thereof is harsh; (b) the public interest needs to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving is very large; and (c) revocation of a driver’s license on the ground of drunk driving should be more severe than the disadvantage of the party due to the revocation, unlike ordinary beneficial administrative acts, unlike the case of ordinary beneficial administrative acts; (d) the Plaintiff’s drinking level constitutes the criteria for revocation of driver’s license under Article 91(1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, with the degree of the Plaintiff’s drinking level 0.181% of blood alcohol level; and (e) there are no special circumstances to deem that the instant disposition is considerably unreasonable; (b) the Plaintiff caused an accident while driving under the influence of alcohol; and (e) the Plaintiff had the history of performing the influence of alcohol driving in the past (0.095% of blood alcohol level on July 29, 201).