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 October 40, 2017, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition to suspend his/her driver’s license (the suspension period: from October 11, 2017 to November 19, 2017). On November 18:57, the suspension period of his/her driver’s license, the Plaintiff driven B-III vehicle on the road in front of the Agricultural Cooperative, the Kacheon-si, Kacheon-si, Kacheon-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant violation”).

B. On December 14, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s second-class ordinary license pursuant to Article 93(1)19 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, 5 through 14 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff was the mother (the age of 93) who supported the plaintiff at the time of the violation of this case was forced to drive his child to gather her mother-child as a hospital. The plaintiff must have a driver's license to maintain his livelihood as he works in the civil engineering field with various employees. Thus, considering these circumstances, the disposition of this case should be revoked because it is excessively harsh to the plaintiff and abused discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. The legality of the instant disposition is determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual by objectively examining the content of the relevant disposition, which is the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000). If the disposition standards are prescribed by Presidential Decree or Ordinance of the Ministry, the disposition standards per se are not in conformity with the Constitution or law, or are in accord with the above disposition standards.