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

A. On June 30, 2019, the Plaintiff driven a sealed Class C and II cargo vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at approximately 5 km section from the 5km section to the fluence station of the Dong-dong Highway located in the Taedong-dong, Taeju-si.

(hereinafter referred to as “drinking driving of this case”). (b)

At the time of the crackdown on drinking driving of this case, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration was measured by 0.084%.

C. On July 12, 2019, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 2 common) pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving the instant drunk.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition on September 5, 2019, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 22, 2019.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5 evidence, Eul evidence 1 through 10 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Considering that the measurement value of a drinking gauge cannot be readily determined as accurate, and that the drinking alcohol level exceeds the criteria for revocation of driver’s license as 0.084%, it cannot be readily concluded that the blood alcohol level at the time of the Plaintiff’s driving is 0.08% or more.

B. The Plaintiff was found to have discovered the following day of drinking, and was not thought to have alcohol in blood at the time of driving.

The plaintiff, as a technician of the sowing machine, has lost his occupation when the driver's license is revoked.

In light of these circumstances, the instant disposition is unlawful.

3. Attached statements to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

4. Determination

A. As to the assertion that the blood alcohol level did not exceed 0.08% at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol, the following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier. (A) The Plaintiff drank two illnesss on June 30, 2019, which was at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case.