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 July 8, 2017, at around 23:05, the Plaintiff driven a rocketing car on the front side of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and went away without taking necessary measures, such as causing a traffic accident (personal injury: 2 at ordinary times, physical damage: 3,115,78 won; hereinafter “instant accident”), and providing relief to the victims.

B. On July 21, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1, class 2, class 2, and class 2 motorcycles) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not take necessary measures even after causing the instant accident (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on September 5, 2017.

[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. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion is essential to maintain his livelihood, the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is the Plaintiff’s relative, who is the owner of the vehicle, leaving the place of locking to request insurance management, etc., the instant disposition is unlawful as a deviation or abuse of discretionary power.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the social norms shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the relevant circumstances. In this case, even if the criteria for the punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance of the Ministry, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the internal business affairs rules of the administrative agency, and it is not effective externally to the public or the court, and whether the disposition is legitimate