1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. 제1심판결의 인용 등 이 법원이 이 사건에 관하여 설시할 이유는 제1심판결 제3쪽 마지막 행의 “측정된 결과로서”를 “측정된 결과일 뿐만 아니라 원고 스스로 당시 자고 일어나서 술이 다 깼다고 생각하고 잠시 운전한 것이라고 주장하고 있어”로 고치는 이외에는 제1심판결의 이유 부분 기재와 같으므로, 행정소송법 제8조 제2항, 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 따라 이를 그대로 인용한다

[Plaintiff’s assertion to the effect that this Court contests the admissibility of evidence of the evidence evidence No. 3 (Report on Statement on Daytime Drivers). However, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the existence or absence of the admissibility of evidence applies to criminal proceedings, and cannot be applied to this case, which is an administrative litigation to which the Civil Procedure Act, etc. applies mutatis mutandis. Meanwhile, given that the facts already established in the relevant criminal trial are proven in the relevant administrative litigation, the facts opposed to this cannot be acknowledged unless there are special circumstances where it is deemed difficult to adopt a judgment on facts in the relevant criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the relevant administrative litigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Du4016, Dec. 29, 2016). The Plaintiff already received a summary order of KRW 5 million in the relevant criminal trial, and such summary order seems to have become final and conclusive in the relevant criminal trial).