(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.02.05 2015구단100305

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) 대전지방법원 2016.02.05 2015구단100305

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 April 1, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary and Class II ordinary driver’s license (E) as of April 14, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “On the street in front of the Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon Pungdong B, driving a D Ecoo vehicle on March 18, 2015, caused the personal fee (four commercial person), water fee, and failing to comply with the on-site relief measures and duty to report” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

B. Criminal conviction against the Plaintiff was finalized on the grounds of the instant disposition, such as the grounds for the instant disposition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul 2 and 15 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) ordered the victims of the traffic accident after the occurrence of the traffic accident, the Plaintiff asked the towing vehicle engineer to issue an accident, and left the taxi to get on and off the taxi. In addition, immediately after the traffic accident, the towing vehicle engineer reported the LIG damage insurance accident and processed the insurance. The Plaintiff did not determine that there was no significant difference between the victims, and there was no intention to escape. 2) The instant disposition was erroneous in the misapprehension of the discretionary authority, taking into account the following: (a) the Plaintiff agreed with the victims; (b) the Plaintiff is operating the truck and there was no previous accident; and (c) the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is necessary due to the operation of the truck; and (d) there was no previous accident.

B. 1) Determination 1) Even if the facts acknowledged in the original civil or administrative litigation are not detained in a criminal trial, the facts recognized in the judgment of the relevant criminal case are significant evidence in civil or administrative litigation, and it cannot be acknowledged that the facts opposed to the facts recognized in the relevant criminal case, barring special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 81Nu324, Sept. 13, 1983).

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015.02.27 2014구단1296

-대전지방법원 2015.01.16 2013구단1442

-대전지방법원 2014.11.07 2014구단1012

-서울고등법원 2017.06.23 2017누31592

-대전지방법원 2015.04.10 2014구단1623