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

A. On August 15, 2019, at around 13:58, the Plaintiff is driving a motor vehicle with drinking alcohol in front of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu.

Even though police officers were requested to take a drinking test, they refused to take such test.

(hereinafter “instant refusal of drinking alcohol measurement”). (b)

On September 24, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common) on the ground of the Plaintiff’s refusal to measure alcohol in the instant case (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On November 21, 2019, the Plaintiff was issued a summary order (fine 12 million won) regarding the refusal of drinking alcohol measurement in the instant case with the Daejeon District Court’s 2019 High Court Branch Decision 201Da7154, and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on December 3, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, significant fact in this court, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was subjected to a sudden accident from another vehicle, but was forced to take a alcohol test by the police officer who was dispatched, the Plaintiff was not able to comply with the alcohol test by considering the fact that he was dice until the previous new wall. The Plaintiff was faced with a sudden accident and not caused a traffic accident. The Plaintiff was in charge of a large business trip as a public official of the Cheongyang-gun Office, which is essential to operate the vehicle, continued blood donation and donation volunteer activities, and there were families who need to support, the instant disposition exceeded the scope of discretionary authority or abused discretionary power.

B. According to the proviso of Article 93(1)3 of the Road Traffic Act, there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a person is under the influence of alcohol.