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 November 26, 2016, around 14:25, the Plaintiff: (a) inflicted an injury upon the victim D, who was on the part of the Plaintiff, and was on the part of the Plaintiff, at the front line B in Daegu-gun, for eight (8) weeks, where the Plaintiff was driving a freight vehicle on the C, and was on the part of the Plaintiff.

B. On December 16, 2016, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff the penalty points of 25 points (the penalty points of 10 points due to the violation of the duty of safety driving + the penalty points of 15 points due to personal traffic accidents) on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the duty of safety driving, etc., and the Plaintiff already was subject to the penalty points of 100 points due to the drinking driving (0.082%) on April 8, 2016.

C. On January 6, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the driver’s license (Class I ordinary) as of February 6, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s one-year aggregate points exceeds 121 points, which is the 125-year aggregate points for the revocation of the driver’s license.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but was dismissed by the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on March 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 11 (including each number, hereinafter the same) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The road where the Plaintiff’s assertion of traffic accident occurred is not the center line, and the degree of violation of the duty of care is insignificant because the damaged urbs by the bend and bend roads are destroyed on the right side. If the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is revoked on the part of the Plaintiff’s occupation, it would make it difficult for the Plaintiff’s family members to maintain their livelihood. Considering the disadvantages and the above circumstances suffered by the Plaintiff due to the instant disposition, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the evidence presented in the first instance judgment, the Plaintiff’s disadvantage suffered by the instant disposition and others.