자동차운전면허취소처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 8, 1970, the Plaintiff acquired Class 1 ordinary car driving license (B) and is driving a private taxi.
B. At around 00:00 on December 7, 2014, the Defendant issued the instant disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s license by applying Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act, on January 13, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven the Plaintiff’s private taxi, which is the Plaintiff’s possession, left straight at a two-lane right-hand left-hand turn from the right-hand left-hand distance at the Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-gu Man-do
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on March 12, 2015, but was dismissed on April 7, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of evidence Nos. 4 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion that he was using radio inside the vehicle at the time of the traffic accident in this case was unable to hear shock, and it was thought that the vehicle was shaking while making a sudden stop, but did not recognize the occurrence of the traffic accident, and the traffic accident in this case was merely minor accidents to the extent that the damaged vehicle was blickly blicked, and there is no reason to escape. The plaintiff cannot be viewed as a driver of the escape vehicle. 2) The plaintiff's commendation as an exemplary driver who driven the accident in this case for 25 years or more, and the plaintiff's living was difficult for the plaintiff's family because his driver's license was revoked, etc.