beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition that revoked the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary and Class 2 ordinary driving licenses pursuant to Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that, on August 11, 2016, the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident that the Plaintiff injured the victim on the road in front of the Ansan-do reservoir located in Ansan-gun, Busan (hereinafter “instant accident”) and did not perform on-site relief measures or duty to report (hereinafter “instant illegal act”).
B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on February 7, 2017.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion had no intention to escape because the plaintiff left the scene of the accident without knowing at all the occurrence of the traffic accident due to his act at the time of the accident in this case.
Therefore, the disposition of this case is null and void or illegal since it was rendered in a situation where there is no ground for the disposition.
B. In full view of the purport of the argument in each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3 and Eul evidence No. 3, the plaintiff can be found guilty of all of the unlawful facts of this case in the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicle) and the Road Traffic Act (In the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) by Busan District Court 2016 Man-Ma2449, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (In the case of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment for August, 200, 40 hours of compliance driving, and 80 hours of community service