Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 13, 1991, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 2 motorcycle driver's license, and the Class 1 ordinary vehicle driver's license (B) on November 16, 1994.
B. At around 02:30 on December 16, 2017, the Plaintiff was charged with a diversative driving that obstructs two times’ course, such as blocking the front side of the damaged vehicle (hereinafter “instant retaliation driving”), on the ground that, while proceeding one-lane of the two-lanes on the inner side of the Seoyang-gu Seoul Western Line, the Do governor’s BMW M3 Passenger Vehicle (hereinafter “victim”) of the victim C driving changed from two-lanes to one-lanes, and that the Plaintiff was charged with a dive driving that obstructs two times’s course, such as blocking the front side of the damaged vehicle. On February 6, 2018, the Plaintiff was charged with the Plaintiff as Seoul Police Station under Article 2018-0949, the Seoul Southern Southern District Prosecutor’s Office was indicted for a special intimidation.
C. Accordingly, on February 6, 2018, the Defendant notified that the Defendant imposed 10 points with the given points.
On January 13, 2018, at least 01:20, the Plaintiff: (a) caused the death by shocking the victim D who was crossing a private taxi without permission while driving a private taxi at the speed of 60 km/h of the speed of 60 km in front of the do-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, in violation of the speed of 56 km/h; and (b) caused the traffic accident causing two passengers to inflict an injury requiring two-day medical treatment (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”); (c) on March 13, 2018, after imposing the penalty points of 85, the Plaintiff’s total sum point of 185 for each year, and (d) exceeded 121 per year, which is the basis for the revocation of the driver’s license.
E. On March 21, 2018, the Defendant applied Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of exceeding the given points.
A disposition to revoke the driver's license stated in the port (hereinafter referred to as "instant disposition") was made.
F. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on June 12, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful