1. The revocation of the driver’s license granted to the Plaintiff on September 24, 2014 by the Defendant is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From August 21, 2013, the Plaintiff is operating a bus on February 13, 2014 while serving as an urban bus driver from (a) the passenger on (b) the date of August 21, 2013.

At the same time of rapid operation, 35 points for each bus passenger's injury (10 points for each bus driver's breach of duty of safety driving, 10 points for each of 10 points for each bus driver's breach of duty of safety driving) have been imposed.

B. After that, around 12:30 on August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff was driving a B bus (hereinafter “Plaintiff bus”) and driving a two-lane road in front of the Dcafeteria located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, while driving in a two-lane, there was an accident where the victim E (hereinafter “victim”) who entered the same lane was driven by the victim E (hereinafter “victim”) and died (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. In the instant accident, the Plaintiff was given a total of 10 points (one person who died of 10 points in violation of the duty of safe driving) and the total sum of 35 points was 135 points. The Defendant issued the instant disposition that revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (one class, one class ordinary) as of September 21, 2014 pursuant to Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 91(1) [Attachment 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, on the ground that the total sum of 10 points exceeds 121 points for the Plaintiff on September 24, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 21, 22, Eul's 1 to 4 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1, the instant accident occurred as the victim went in the two-lanes at the time of the instant accident, changing the course of the Plaintiff’s bus in the future, and the victim did not wear the safety cap at the time.

Therefore, the above accident was caused by the plaintiff's duty of safe driving.

Even if it was difficult to avoid the accident, and it is rather than the plaintiff's duty of safe driving in the occurrence of the accident.