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

가. 원고는 2020. 4. 2. 21:45경 B 베라크루즈 승용차를, 이천시 C에 있는 ‘D편의점 이천대월점’ 앞 도로에서부터 같은 E건물 주차장까지 운전하다가 그곳에 주차된 포터 화물차를 충격하는 사고를 일으키고, 이어 신고를 받고 출동한 경찰관이, 원고에게서 술 냄새가 나고 얼굴이 붉으며 보행이 비틀거리는 등 원고가 술을 마시고 자동차를 운전하였다고 의심할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 원고에게 음주측정을 요구하였으나, 원고는 음주측정을 하지 않겠다고 말하며 음주측정기 불대에 바람을 부는 시늉만 하는 등의 방법으로 음주측정요구에 불응하였다.

B. On April 29, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground of the Plaintiff’s refusal to take a drinking test (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on June 23, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the police officer, upon receiving a report, found the accident at home and asked for a drinking test and offered a passive response to the Plaintiff’s demand for a drinking test.

The plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent, and the plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent, but there are many business activities to gather and female customers, so if the driver's license is revoked, it is impossible to perform his/her duties and it is necessary to discontinue his/her work, and the plaintiff must support his/her child.