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

A. On January 20, 2017, the Plaintiff holding a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license: (a) around 18:15, while under the influence of alcohol at a level of 0.108%, driving C-car on the road located in the small village of the Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City from about 500 meters to the roads located in the same Gu B-house; (b) was shocked in three directions in the front direction; and (c) accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered injury to three persons aboard each of the above damaged vehicles requiring two weeks’ medical treatment.

B. On February 8, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary driver’s license on the ground of the above drinking driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on May 31, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 3 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In full view of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion is delayed and that he/she was selected as a dismissed person on the ground that he/she had disability, and that he/she drinks alcoholic beverages on a half-time basis, taking into account the fact that he/she had a relatively small storage near 0.10% of the revocation standard for the license, taking into account the Plaintiff’s situation, a person who has suspended conditional dismissal by taking into account the Plaintiff’s work performance for six months, and where he/she is unable to drive an essential business for six months, he/she is likely to be dismissed due to low work performance and future dismissal, and that he/she must support alone, the instant disposition is more unfavorable than the public interest that may be gained from the instant disposition, and thus, the instant disposition was deviates from and abused discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. The issue of whether the 1 disciplinary administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is concerned with the content of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the act in question, and all