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 October 12, 2016, the Plaintiff was given 100 points with penalty points on the ground that he/she was convicted of retaliation driving.

On May 20, 2017, at around 03:30, the Plaintiff: (a) while driving a rocketing taxi in front of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the 2nd day on May 20, 2017, the Plaintiff rapidly changed the lane from the two lanes to three lanes in front of the Seoul Gangnam-gu, the Plaintiff was able to get the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant retaliationed driving”). The Plaintiff was given 100 marks again as the retaliationed driving of the instant case.

B. On June 5, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 large and Class 1 common) on the ground that the Plaintiff exceeded the base point of 200 points (121 points) per year (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on June 22, 2017, but was dismissed on August 8, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 4-1, 2, 5 through 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion that retaliationed driving of the instant case was derived from the Plaintiff’s bath theory; (b) there were circumstances to take into account the background thereof; (c) there was no significant damage caused by the retaliationed driving of the instant case; and (d) there was a smooth agreement with D only with D; and (c) the instant disposition would result in difficulties in livelihood if the Plaintiff becomes unable to drive a taxi, a business entity, due to the instant disposition, would result in a loss of livelihood

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. Whether the instant legal administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretion, the content of the offense as the ground for the disposition.