beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 14, 1981, the Plaintiff acquired and driven a Class II motorcycle, Class II ordinary motor vehicle (B) on December 24, 1982, and Class I ordinary motor vehicle on April 10, 1985. On November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff driven the car volume by driving the car at C at around 00:25 on November 16, 2015, and escaped without taking relief measures, etc., even if he/she suffered injury to the driver and passengers for two weeks, resulting in a traffic accident, resulting in physical damage.
B. Accordingly, on December 16, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license by applying Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act.
C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on January 11, 2016, but was dismissed on February 16, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] The entry in the evidence Nos. 4 and 6 of Eul and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant disposition is unreasonable on the ground that the instant accident did not cause injury to the victims or that there was a minor injury that could not interfere with their daily life due to the nature therapy, and thus, there was no need to take relief measures, etc. against the victims at the time. 2) Even if it is acknowledged that the Plaintiff had escaped without taking relief measures, even if the Plaintiff was deemed to have injured people due to a traffic accident, the degree of violation by the Plaintiff, the degree of damage to the victims is minor, the damage was fully repaid, and the Plaintiff’s life is difficult due to the cancellation of the driver’s license on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s license is essential for a small-sized truck driver.
B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 9-1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 6, 7, 12 through 17 and the purport of the entire pleadings, are significant shock by the plaintiff vehicle following the damaged taxi vehicle.