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

On June 17, 1978, the plaintiff obtained a Class 1 ordinary driver's license.

On May 18, 2018, the Plaintiff, while driving a Doppland in C on the front road located in D Dopland B at D Dopland on May 18, 2018, found a police officer who is under drinking control and avoided drinking control, went away approximately 12 km distance from the front road located in the same Eup without disregarding the police's order of suspension.

As above, the Defendant imposed a total of 250 points points on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff committed a violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “each of the instant violations”) over 10 times, including five times in the center line, four times in violation of signal, one time in violation of the duty of safe driving, etc., as shown in the attached Table 1 list, in the course of driving approximately 12 km in order to avoid drinking control by police officers.

On July 9, 2018, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license as of August 14, 2018 pursuant to Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the accumulated points of the Plaintiff’s score for one year constitutes at least 121 points, which are the criteria for revocation of the driver’s license.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case’s Disposition”). (hereinafter “instant Disposition”), without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, and 12, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the legitimacy of the Disposition in this case’s Disposition in this case’s entirety, each of the instant offenses committed a violation of the Road Traffic Act, which constitutes the same crime under the name of the same crime, on several consecutive occasions, by the Plaintiff’s single intent to avoid drinking control, and thus, it is unlawful to impose penalty points by deeming it as a separate offense.

In addition, according to the defendant's investigation guidelines on vehicles that escape in response to the crackdown on drunk driving, evidence for each of the offenses of this case is not secured due to the failure of the police vehicle image devices at the time of crackdown, although the on-site situation is to be taken or the evidence is to be secured, such as black stuff images.