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

A. On August 30, 2015, the Plaintiff driven a car for 00:25 B PP on the two weeks, driving the car to the government from the Dob 1417 in the direction of the sub-committee of the National Bank of Korea, while driving the car to the government on the Dob Dob 1417 in peace at the same time, the Plaintiff got off the victim C driving who was standing in the signal waiting at the front bank and got out of the back of the car (hereinafter “the instant accident”) due to the accident, the Plaintiff suffered from the victim C and the victim E, who was in the front line, for approximately two weeks of treatment.

B. On November 26, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary driver’s license as of December 14, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff had inflicted injury on the victim due to the instant accident and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as aiding the victim.

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal on February 22, 2016, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on April 12, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 16, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, 12, and 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s mistake of the grounds for disposition is not immediately stopped on the wind that follows the accident immediately after the accident in this case, and is proceeding to a degree of 100 meters without immediately stopping on the wind that follows the accident scene, and is not intentionally deserted or escaped from the accident site. In addition, even though the victims following the accident were asked for a fine, it was confirmed that the victims were punished, and the Defendant’s disposition was erroneous in the fact that the Plaintiff made the instant disposition, even though it was investigated by the police, and took relief measures, such as receiving the accident from the insurance company. (2) The Plaintiff agreed with the victims, and the Plaintiff did not intentionally deviate from the accident site.