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 March 31, 2018, the Defendant, on the ground that “the Plaintiff, from around 15:48 on July 30, 2018 to around 15:54, from around July 30, 2018 to around 15:54, the Defendant issued a revocation disposition for the driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff’s marks of the Plaintiff were added up to the Plaintiff’s respective marks of the traffic law violations, including: (a) driving at approximately 174 km speed exceeding 10 km per hour from the point of 22 km to the point of 37.7 km away from the west-ri Seoul west-ri Seoul west-ri (hereinafter “instant dispositive disposition”).

B. On September 12, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on October 17, 2018, the Plaintiff rendered a final judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 12 and 13, Gap evidence Nos. 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Article 46-3 of the Road Traffic Act provides that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the act of continuing or repeating a single act is a single sckless driving, and the Defendant has been punished as one criminally inclusive. However, even if all individual grounds constituting a sckless driving are separated from each act, the Defendant applied the method of adding the given points for each act. The instant disposition is unlawful or is at least an abuse of discretionary power, since it is not recognized that the method of imposing given points is reasonable.

B. (1) The criteria for the revocation disposition of a driver’s license under Article 91(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act are merely the internal guidelines of administrative agencies, and thus, it is not externally binding on the people or the court. Thus, the legality of the revocation disposition of a driver’s license pursuant to the above disposition standards should not be determined by the above disposition standards, but by the contents and purport of the provision of the Road Traffic Act.

3.2