http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 주제어 : Administrative Penalties of Driver's license (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
복수면허에 대한 운전면허 행정처분의 효력범위에 대한 연구
정초영 경찰대학교 2010 경찰학연구 Vol.10 No.3
One can acquire multiple driver's licenses allowing him or her to drive different kinds of motor vehicles by the Road Traffic Laws. However, when the revocation or suspension are needed, the standards of law reports are used, not legal regulations for revocation of dual licenses. The Supreme Court suggests the standards of total revocation of multiple licenses as follows; 'the case where the reason of revocation or suspension has something in common with other license or person who received the license.' The court, however, depends on the kinds of motor vehicle that is used when the license is revoked or suspended, not the person who received the license to decide total revocation. As a result, ignoring the examination of driving aptitude such as how often one drinks and drives, how many accidents one causes, and how often one breaks the traffic regulation, the court set the standard of total revocation considering the common points depending on the kinds of motor vehicle that is used when the license is revoked or suspended. In this case, a driver without driving aptitude (who drank and drove, exceeded penalty points) is improperly allowed to keep on driving on the road because of the reason that there is no commonness in driving license. A driver's license has the administration tendency as the police authorization allowing driving on the road, so the driver who is unsuitable to driving on the road must not be allowed to drive on the road totally (including multiple licenses). As the German example we see in the front part of this article, the unsuitable drivers should be excluded in the traffic community for other drivers safety. This is why the point of the Supreme Court's precedent has some problem, so the standards of total revocation of multiple license should be put on the person who get the driver's license (driving suitable aptitude). Fundamentally the article 93 of the Road Traffic Laws should be revised and new regulation should be stipulated for the purpose of the total revocation of multiple license when the revocation or suspension are needed. However, establishing new regulation for the total revocation without considering driving unadaptability or general principle of administrative law can be blamed for abusing the administrative power. Therefore when the causes of the revocation or suspension are made, the reason of revocation or suspension itself should be equal to the level of total revocation of dual license (driving unadaptability as a traffic community member). Such being the case, the reason for total revocation and suspension of the 93 of the Road Traffic Laws should be divided into total revocation and part revocation, and extra study is needed in this field.
-
음주운전에 의한 복수 운전면허취소처분 판례의 문제점과 관련법제의 개선방안 - 대법원 2018.2.28.선고 2017두67476 판결을 중심으로 -
이상만 ( Lee Sang-man ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2018 홍익법학 Vol.19 No.2
현행 도로교통법 및 제반 관련 법규에서는 일정 자격을 취득한 해당 운전자에 한하여 운전면허 자격을 부여하고, 각 개별적 요건을 갖춘 경우에 복수의 운전면허를 발급함으로써 운전자의 운전면허를 통합관리하고 있다. 또한 음주운전 등 운전자가 준수해야 할 안전주의의무를 위반한 경우에는 운전자격을 박탈하는 등의 행정제재를 규정하고 있다. 오늘날 자동차 운전은 생활의 편리함을 추구하는 도구를 넘어 생계수단과 밀접한 관련이 있지만, 이러한 자동차 이용의 증가와는 달리 국민들의 자동차 운전에 대한 안전주의의무의 인식은 상대적으로 부족하다. 특히, 음주운전과 관련해서는, 한 번쯤 누구나 행할 수 있는 실수 정도로 취급하며 관용을 미덕으로 생각하는 것이 사회적 분위기였다. 그러나 지속적으로 증가하는 음주운전에 따른 사회 문제와 사회전체가 부담해야 하는 경제적 손실비용의 증가로 인해 음주운전은 더 이상 용인되어야 할 개인의 문제가 아니라 함께 공동대응해야 할 사회문제가 되었다. 이런 사회분위기를 반영하듯, 최근 대법원은 2018. 2. 28. 선고 2017두67476 판결을 통해 음주운전에 대한 일반 예방적 측면을 적극 반영하여 복수의 운전면허 취소가 위법·부당하지 않다는 내용을 판시하였다. 이 판결은 음주운전에 대해 현재 우리나라는 외국에 비해 제재가 약하기 때문에 음주운전 근절을 위해 제재를 강화하는 등의 예방적 대책이 필요하다는 측면에서 볼 때, 환영할 만한 판결이다. 반면, 과거의 유사한 사례와 음주운전에 의한 복수 운전면허의 취소범위가 상이한 결과를 가져왔다는 점에서는 그 타당성이 검토되어야 할 판례이다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 음주운전에 의한 복수 운전면허 취소와 관련한 기존 판례의 입장과 최근 대법원 판결을 비교 고찰하는 방법을 통해서 그 차이점과 문제점을 분석하고, 이를 기초로 일선 행정처분을 행하는 공무원들이 업무를 수행함에 있어 불필요한 혼란을 예방하고 행정행위의 실효성을 확보하기 위해 관련법제인 도로교통법 및 동법 시행규칙 등의 제반규정에 대한 개선방안을 모색함으로써 통일성 있는 행정제재와 행정기관의 재량권 행사의 기준을 마련하고자 한다. The current Road Traffic Act and all the related legislations are integrally managing a driver's license through giving the driver's license qualification with limiting to a corresponding driver who acquired the certain qualification, and through issuing multiple driver's license in case of having each individual requirement. Also, an administrative restriction such as disqualifying driving is being provided in case of violating safety precaution obligation that a driver will need to abide by such as drunk driving. A vehicle driving of the day has a close relationship with a means of living beyond a tool of pursuing the convenience of life. But people's recognition of safety precaution obligation on vehicle driving is relatively lacking unlike this rise in vehicles. Especially in terms of drunk driving, it was social atmosphere to think of generosity as a virtue with treating it just as a mistake that anybody can make at one time or another. However, due to a social issue according to drunk driving of growing continuously and to a rise in economic loss costs that the whole society needs to bear, the drunk driving resulted in a social issue of needing to be jointly confronted together, not a personal problem of being likely needed to be allowed any more. As if this social atmosphere is reflected, the Supreme Court ruled the contents as saying that the multiple driver's license revocation is not illegal and undue, through positively reflecting the generally preventive aspect on drunk driving recently through the Feb. 28, 2018 sentence-2017du67276 Judgment. As for drunk driving, this judgment is the one enough to be welcomed when considering from the aspect of being necessary for preventive measures such as stepping up a restriction for eradicating the drunk driving because our country has a weaker sanction against drunk driving compared to foreign countries. On the other hand, in that the similar case in the past and the revocation range of multiple driver's license caused by drunk driving brought about a different outcome, it is a precedent whose validity will need to be examined. Accordingly, this study analyzes its difference and problem through a method of comparatively considering the existing position relevant to the cancellation of multiple driver's license caused by drunk driving, and the recent judgement of the Supreme Court, and seeks an improvement plan for all the regulations such as the Road Traffic Act and the enforcement rules, which are the related legislations, in order to prevent unnecessary confusion and to secure effectiveness of the administrative act in which frontline public officials of taking an administrative measure carry out duty based on this. Hence, the aim is to arrange the criteria for the unified administrative restriction and for the exercise of discretionary powers in administrative agency.
RISS
KISS연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
