beta
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 August 1, 2015, the Plaintiff driven a B-car on August 14:41, 2015, and driven along two lanes among the two-lanes of navigation distance at the front of the C-lane in the middle-distance intersection in the Gunsan City, the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident (one of them; hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) leading to a shocking part of the upper part of the F-car in front of the traffic signal at the said intersection in the front of the right side of the said vehicle.
B. On September 4, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1, 2, and 2) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff caused the instant accident and did not perform the on-site relief measures and duty to report, even though having caused the instant accident.
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on October 22, 2015 regarding the instant disposition, but was dismissed on November 20, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1 to 15, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful since the Plaintiff did not recognize the fact of the accident on the wind due to a long distance driving and did not report the accident. As such, the instant disposition based on the premise that the Plaintiff had an intention on the part of the Plaintiff is unlawful. Even if the Plaintiff had intention on domestic affairs, considering that the Plaintiff, despite the age of the Plaintiff, was opening and serving as a member in a G area located far away from his residence, and the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is necessary to do so, the Defendant’s disposition of this case is deemed to be unlawful as it was excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, as well as the residents of G area who received medical benefits from the Plaintiff, and thus, is against the Plaintiff’s discretionary authority.
(b)(1) In administrative litigation, it is not binding on the facts found in a criminal trial.