logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.24 2019구단120
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 October 30, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class I and class II motor vehicles) as of December 4, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff driven C motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.139% on the front of the Daegu North-gu building B on October 19, 2018 under the influence of alcohol level of 0.139% (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).

B. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on December 18, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion made efforts to avoid driving under the influence of alcohol, such as driving a vehicle at his house or using a substitute driving, etc. When the plaintiff's argument is in a usual drinking, the plaintiff was making efforts to avoid driving under the influence of alcohol. The plaintiff was not a substitute driver after drinking alcohol at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case but failed to explain his position well, and was in cooperation with the investigation, the confession of the crime immediately after the control and cooperation was made, the driving under the influence of this case does not interfere with traffic flow or cause traffic accidents; the plaintiff was working at the emergency patient transport center as an emergency driver and emergency rescue staff, and the driver's license is essential for performing his duties; the plaintiff's life is very difficult due to the disposition in this case; and the plaintiff's wife's wife's wife is driving under the influence of discretion and illegal by abusing discretion.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, is intended to achieve by the content of the act of disposal, which is the reason for the disposition.

arrow