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

A. The Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 driver’s license for large vehicles, ordinary vehicles, and Class 2 driver’s license for ordinary vehicles.

B. On May 23, 2018, at around 16:50, the Plaintiff driven a B concrete mixed truck (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and proceeded with a road in front of C, located in the mountain area of the mountain area of the mountain village. The Plaintiff, while changing the vehicle from the first lane to the second lane, shicked the part on the left-hand side of the victim’s DNA driving, which was driven by the Plaintiff, along with the alteration of the vehicle from the second lane, to the two lanes, into the right-hand side of the said truck.

As a result, the Plaintiff, by negligence in the course of performing his duties, sustained injuries such as salt, tensions, etc., on the part of the victim F of the victim who was on board the damaged vehicle, by causing injuries to the victim F of the victim who was on board the damaged vehicle for about two weeks of medical treatment, and at the same time, did not immediately stop the damaged vehicle and take necessary measures for the occurrence of the accident, such as aiding the victims, and escaped from the accident site.

C. On July 7, 2018, the Defendant is against the Plaintiff.

In accordance with Article 93 (1) 6 of the Road Traffic Act, the instant disposition was taken to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class I large, ordinary, and Class II ordinary) as of August 7, 2018 on the grounds of the facts constituting the crime under the provision of this case.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, but was dismissed on September 1, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unreasonable to revoke the instant driver’s license for Class I and II ordinary vehicles even though they are vehicles that can drive with a Class I driver’s license for large vehicles, and considering the fact that the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is essential to carry out the Plaintiff’s occupation and maintain his livelihood, the instant disposition is taken.