Personal taxi license

The Daegu District Court is legal to dispose of the local government that revoked the taxi driver’s

License due to the suspension of drunk driving license for drunk driving

Judge Heo Yi-hoon of the Daegu District Court rejected all of the plaintiff’s claims and rejected the plaintiff’s

Claim that the defendant’s disposition was legitimate in seeking revocation of the taxi driver’s license on

August 20, 2023, claiming that the plaintiff, who was revoked by the defendant (the head of Seo-gu, Daegu)

For suspension of his drunk driving license, had procedural defects, deviations and abuse of discretion

And violations of the principle of excessive prohibition 스마트스토어상위노출

At 10:13 p.m. on August 26, 2022, the Plaintiff drove a private taxi with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.081%

(cancellation of a license of 0.08% or more) for about 500m from Naedang-dong, Seo-gu

Daegu to the road in front of the store in 206 Government Bond Sangbo-ro, the same district.

The head of the Daegu Police Agency canceled his driver’s license on October 7, 2022, but accepted the

Plaintiff’s objection and reduced it to a 110-day suspension of his driver’s license on December 19, 2022.

The plaintiff received a summary order of 6 million won for drunk driving in this case, and did not request a formal trial

So the summary order was confirmed on October 25, 2022.

On December 18, 2022, Defendant revoked Plaintiff’s taxi driving qualifications based on the provisions of Articles 87

(1) 3 and 24 (3) 4 of the Passenger Transport Business Act because the driver’s license was suspended for drunk driving in this case.

Then, the Plaintiff filed an administrative lawsuit against the Defendant seeking revocation of the taxi driver’s qualification.

Because the Plaintiff was on leave at the time of drunk driving in this case

And he/she got an urgent call from his/her friend after having dinner with B, the East and West since it was his/her birthday

Personal taxi license

And that not only the Plaintiff but also the Plaintiff’s family could be in an economically difficult situation due to the disposition of this case

And that the legal provisions based on the disposition of this case, which require the cancellation of taxi driving qualifications uniformly

Violate the principle of prohibition of excess, and infringe on property rights.

The first trial’s sole court said that the Defendant disposed of this case without going through procedures

Such as prior notice of disposition under Articles 21 (4) 2 and 22 (4) of the Administrative Procedure Act

So it cannot be said that there is a defect in the procedure of violating the Administrative Procedure Act.

Article 24 (3) of the Passenger Automobile Act stipulates the reasons for disqualification from obtaining a driver’s

License and does not obtain a driver’s license for a certain period (5 years in subparagraph 3 and

3 years in subparagraph 4) if a driver’s license is revoked or suspended for certain reasons.

Under the Passenger Vehicle Act, transportation workers’ driver’s qualifications need

To be regulated much more strictly than ordinary people’s driver’s license qualifications under the Road Traffic Act

And according to Article 24 (3) 4 of the Passenger Vehicle Act, three years after the suspension of the driver’s license

Can be obtained again (under Article 3 of the same paragraph, if a driver’s license is revoked due to drunk driving

It must be five years before the driver’s qualification can be obtained again)

It was judged that the legal provisions based on the disposition in this case violated the principle of prohibition

Of excess and could not be regarded as infringing on the property rights of the private taxi transport business operator.

Personal taxi license – 개인택시면허