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

On November 18, 2019, at around 23:47, the Plaintiff driven BMW car volume while under the influence of 0.111% of blood alcohol level on the road before a substitute box located in 371, Masan-ro, Masan-ro, Masan-ro (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).

On December 7, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On January 6, 2020, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on February 18, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the entire argument as to legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff's drinking driving of this case did not occur due to the plaintiff's assertion as to legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the distance of drinking driving of this case is only 500 meters, the plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation into drinking driving of this case, the plaintiff's vehicle driver's license is necessary, and the driving is an important means to maintain the family's livelihood, and the disposition of this case faces economic difficulties, etc., the disposition of this case is unlawful as it deviates from and abused the scope of discretionary authority.

Judgment

Today, in light of the fact that there is a growing need to strictly observe traffic regulations according to the reduction of traffic conditions due to the rapid increase of automobiles and the large number of driver's licenses, and the traffic accidents due to driving by driving by driving by driving by driving frequently and there are many cases where the results are harsh, so it is necessary to strictly regulate driving by driving by driving, it is more necessary to realize public interest rather than disadvantages suffered by driving drivers who do not cause traffic accidents due to the revocation of license (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu10812, Oct. 11, 1996).