1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On October 21, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1, Class 2, Class 2, and B) as of November 17, 2015 pursuant to Article 93(1)6 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “Act”) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not perform on-site relief measures or duty to report even after driving a motor vehicle while drinking (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”) as stated in the separate facts constituting a crime.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, evidence Nos. 1 and 16, the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The instant disposition asserted by the Plaintiff is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) The Plaintiff was unable to achieve a diving with the preceding stress and was in a difficult state, and was in a bad condition and was unable to recognize the instant traffic accident itself, as it was insignificant in the accident margin and did not recognize the instant traffic accident itself, there is no reason for disposition. 2) There is a reason for normal reference as indicated in the attached list.

B. Determination 1) Since sanctions imposed on a violation of administrative laws and regulations are sanctions imposed on the objective facts that constitute a violation of administrative laws and regulations to achieve administrative purposes, sanctions may be imposed without intention or negligence on the violator, unless there exists any justifiable ground that does not lead to the failure of the violator to perform his/her duties, such as a situation in which the violator could reasonably indicate that he/she did not know his/her duties, or a circumstance in which he/she could not expect the relevant party to perform his/her duties, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2014Du15139, Apr. 9, 2015; 2010Du24371, Jun. 28, 2012; 2010Du24371, Jun. 28, 2012; 2000Du3771, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact of leaving the crosswalk as it is without taking measures, such as aiding the victim of the instant traffic accident, and the Plaintiff’s bicycle has a sound.