1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The plaintiff asserts that the police officers belonging to the Kimpo Police Station kept in custody the number plate of the plaintiff's passenger vehicle on the ground of the administrative fine before the deadline for payment, and the plaintiff suffered from mental suffering such as serious windows due to maintaining the situation, and therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff.

According to the evidence evidence No. 2, it is recognized that the Chief of the Kimpo police station, on August 30, 2016, issued a notice to the Plaintiff to pay an unpaid administrative fine on September 11, 2016 to the end of the same month. However, on September 1, 2016, the police officers belonging to the Kimpo Police Station kept the Plaintiff’s number plate (hereinafter “instant number plate”) in custody on September 1, 2016, before the said period expires.

However, according to the statements and the overall purport of the arguments and arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6, the unpaid administrative fines, which were the reasons for holding the number plate of this case, were four administrative fines for the violation committed in 2013 and 2016, and the increased additional charges have already been imposed upon the expiration of the payment period. On August 8, 2016, which was before the provisional holding of the number plate of this case, the Kimpo police station notified the plaintiff that the vehicle number plate would be kept in custody if the plaintiff did not pay the unpaid administrative fines, and the notification reached the plaintiff around that time. Accordingly, it is also recognized that the notice reached the plaintiff. Accordingly, the "Guidance to pay the unpaid administrative fines" of the head of the above Kimpo Police station on August 30, 2016 is merely a demand for voluntary payment of the unpaid administrative fines whose payment period has already expired.

Therefore, the provisional holding of the number plate of this case cannot be deemed to constitute an illegal act, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

If so, the plaintiff.