logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.10.26 2016구단7853
자동차운전면허취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On February 19, 2016, the Defendant issued the instant disposition that the Plaintiff revoked the Plaintiff’s Class I large scale and Class I ordinary car driver’s license (license number: C) as of April 13, 2016, by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on April 5, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, entry in Eul 4 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion was made after about 60 minutes from the final drinking time, and about 108 minutes from the alcohol measurement. The plaintiff's drinking operation time is highly likely to have increased the blood alcohol concentration after drinking. Since the plaintiff's blood alcohol concentration which was measured thereafter is a numerical value at the time when the riseest level is past, the above blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving cannot be applied to the plaintiff because the plaintiff's blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving was not indicated.

However, even if the plaintiff did not do so, the plaintiff is forced to drive under the influence of alcohol because the mobile phone does not communicate with the substitute engineer due to the failure of the mobile phone after the opening of the door, which is a part of the plaintiff's employment problem, in order to discuss the problem of the plaintiff's employment. The plaintiff is a bus driver from D Co., Ltd., and the plaintiff is working as a bus driver at D Co., Ltd., and the driver's license is revoked, there is a risk of withdrawal if the driver's license is revoked, and the victims of traffic accidents filed an application against the plaintiff, and the plaintiff supports his wife and children, his mother and her mother (class 2 with developmental disorder). In light of the above, the disposition of this case is too harsh to the plaintiff and abused the scope of discretionary power.

B. As to the assertion regarding the 1 blood alcohol concentration, time interval between the point of time when the alcohol driving was conducted and the point of time when the blood alcohol concentration was measured.

arrow