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

A. On January 26, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking a driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 00:08 on December 13, 2018, driven B car to E in front of the Eth (1km) located in D on the front of the Masan-si C Apartment-gu, Changwon-si, Masan-si (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

B. On January 22, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on March 5, 2019, the Plaintiff rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an abuse of discretion when considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not have the history of drinking driving and traffic accidents, that is a simple drinking driver who did not cause any damage, that is, the need for vocational driving, the family’s livelihood, etc.

B. (1) Determination is that the public interest needs to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today's frequent and severe results, and the revocation of driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is more severe than the case of general beneficial administrative acts, unlike the case of general beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the revocation should be emphasized. The Plaintiff's driving level constitutes the criteria for revocation of driver's license under Article 91 (1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, with the degree of the Plaintiff's driving level 0.131% of blood alcohol concentration.

(2) In addition, taking into account the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol, blood alcohol concentration, and revocation of driver’s license is able to obtain a license again after a certain period of time, and the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period, the circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff.