1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On April 5, 2016, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 large, class 1 ordinary, class 1 ordinary, special strawers, special strawers, and class 2 small-sized vehicles) as of May 8, 2016 on the ground that the Plaintiff driven the B low-speed car while under the influence of alcohol at the new intersection in the new intersection where the blood alcohol level of 0.203% was driven at the new intersection of Jin-si on March 12, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In principle, in a case where a person who asserted by the plaintiff has obtained multiple driver's license, it is deemed to separately handle the same in revocation. In an exceptional case, in a case where the grounds for revocation are neither a specific license nor a specific license, nor a person who has obtained a driver's license, and the scope of a vehicle that can be driven with another driver's license is wide and the scope of a vehicle that can be driven with a driver's license is required to be revoked is included in

The plaintiff's driver's license was revoked by driving a motor vehicle with a low-speed driver's license, and the revocation of the first-class driver's license does not include the prohibition of driving a motor vehicle that can be operated with a second-class driver's license.

If the Road Traffic Act holds a number of driver's licenses, all of the licenses can be revoked. However, the amendment for administrative convenience does not have a necessary reason for revocation, but has a voluntary reason for revocation, except for violation of laws and regulations due to the use of safety belts for 17 years, and the disposition of this case revoked to the plaintiff's second-class driver's license which is essential for business as an insurance solicitor, should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. (1) Determination is (1) amended by Act No. 13829 on January 27, 2016, and Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which entered into force on the same day.