Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On June 30, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol 0.216% during blood, was driving D-car on the front side of C in the Gunsan City (hereinafter “driving of this case”) on the roads in front of C in the Gunsan City (hereinafter “driving of this case”) and caused an accident to conceal the freight vehicle which was stopped.

B. On July 20, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary driver’s license on the ground of the instant drinking driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(c)

On August 17, 2020, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative adjudication on August 17, 2020, but the Central Administrative Adjudication Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s administrative appeal on September 15, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are relatively short in the distance of the plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8. The plaintiff did not have any history of causing a traffic accident or driving a drinking prior to the driving of the drinking of this case, and the plaintiff recognized the plaintiff's mistake, and again does not drive the drinking.

In light of all circumstances, such as the fact that the Plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation, and the Plaintiff’s duty to act as an agent at the construction site, and the driver’s license is essential in light of the characteristics of the work, and if the driver’s license is revoked, the Plaintiff and his dependents are faced with heavy living conditions and are difficult to maintain their livelihood. The instant disposition is unlawful as it exceeds the scope of discretion or abused discretion.

Whether the instant disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretionary power under the relevant legal doctrine as to whether it exceeded the scope of discretionary power or abused discretionary power, the degree of infringement of public interest by objectively examining the content of the offense, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto, etc.