logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.05.20 2016구단6225
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. On November 10, 2015, the Defendant’s revocation of the first-class and second-class driver’s license for the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 20, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired Class I driver’s license for small automobiles (B) on December 20, 201 and Class II driver’s license for small automobiles (B).

On October 29, 2015, while under the influence of 01:20% of blood alcohol concentration, the Plaintiff driven a CMW car and caused a traffic accident that causes physical damage by shocking buses parked at the public parking lot located at the 75mnan Arts plaza-gu in Ansan-gu in Ansan-gu in Ansansan-si.

B. On November 10, 2015, the Defendant issued the instant disposition to fully revoke the Plaintiff’s license for Class I ordinary and Class II small driving licenses pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under influence of alcohol as above.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The illegality of revocation of a Class II driver’s license for a vehicle driven by the Plaintiff at the time of the instant case cannot be driven with a Class II driver’s license, which is unlawful. The revocation is unlawful. 2) A deviation from discretionary power has been placed in the public parking lot, which is the place of the instant accident, at the time of the instant accident by proxy driving, but a proxy engineer was parked so that the Plaintiff could not be parked again and parked again, and a minor drilling accident occurred. The Plaintiff did not drive under the influence of alcohol for 7 years by proxy driving in the event of drinking even if he does not drink, the Plaintiff’s failure to drive under the influence of drinking for 7 years; the Plaintiff’s business operation without a driver’s license was significantly difficult; and the Plaintiff’s family’s livelihood is very difficult; and the Plaintiff’s voluntary activities through a small amount or social contribution was under the influence of discretionary power.

(b) Where a person with respect to a Class 2 driver's license for small vehicles on a board has obtained multiple kinds of driver's license.

arrow