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 1, 2016, at around 23:45, the Plaintiff was required to take a alcohol test on at least three occasions from a police officer who was under the influence of drinking at the time while driving a CSP car on the front side of the B apartment 730-dong, Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant police officer”) on May 1, 2016, around 23:58, May 23:1, 2016, around 00:10, May 2, 2016, around 0:20, around 3:20, and on three occasions on the same day.

B. On May 12, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 and class 2) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not comply with a police officer’s demand for alcohol alcohol measurement even though there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Plaintiff driven a vehicle under the influence of alcohol (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on October 21, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not have a state of driving prohibited by the Road Traffic Act at the time of the request for a measurement of alcohol level. 2) The traffic control guidelines for the traffic control official should comply with the traffic control guidelines of the National Police Agency in making the request for a measurement of alcohol level. However, the instant police official did not clearly notify the Plaintiff of the disadvantages associated with the refusal of a measurement of alcohol level while requesting a measurement of alcohol level in violation of the traffic control guidelines, and arrested the Plaintiff as a flagrant offender in the absence of 30 minutes after the first request for a measurement of alcohol level. Accordingly, the instant disposition was illegal due to the illegal arrest level. (B) The instant police official refused the Plaintiff’s request for a measurement of alcohol level in the illegal arrest state.