1. On May 5, 2020, the Defendant’s revocation of the driver’s license (class 1 large, class 1 ordinary) against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At around 11:24 on March 25, 2020, the Plaintiff: (a) driven a motor vehicle at the front of B in the front of B innju City to turn to the left; (b) did not find the victim (the victim (the plaintiff is nine years of age and South) who was getting a bicycle on the left-hand side from the Plaintiff’s right-hand side; and (c) did not receive the victim from the front-hander of the said motor vehicle and

(hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. On May 5, 2020, the Defendant revoked the driver’s license on the ground that the Plaintiff, at the time of the instant accident, went away from the site without taking measures such as informing the victim of contact address or providing relief to the victim.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition on May 7, 2020, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on June 23, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 13, 16, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The non-existence of the grounds for disposition was abused and abused its discretion, taking account of the following: (a) the Plaintiff, who was informed of the victim’s name and provided treatment to the victim; (b) but the victim refused to provide treatment and left the scene of the accident; (c) thus, the instant disposition was unlawful without any grounds for disposition; (d) the Plaintiff’s consent with the parent of the victim; and (e) the Plaintiff was likely to suffer economic difficulties due to the instant disposition.

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

C. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged based on Gap evidence No. 14 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is deemed that the plaintiff failed to perform on-site relief measures or duty to report after the instant accident.