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

A. On February 14, 2019, at around 00:03, the Plaintiff driven B 5 vehicles under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.051% from the area near the Samyang-dong, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Kuyang-gu to the intersection in front of the participation of the Philippines, Yangyang-gu, Soyang-gu, Soyang-gu.

The plaintiff started after the signal signal at the above intersection, and the part behind the benz motor vehicle in front of the plaintiff was collisioned with the front part of the plaintiff's motor vehicle, and two persons on the benz motor vehicle in front of the plaintiff's motor vehicle suffered bodily injury, such as cinal salt.

B. On March 28, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to the Plaintiff to revoke the first-class ordinary driver’s license and second-class ordinary driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018; Act No. 16037, Jun. 25, 2019).

C. On April 19, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on May 14, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 to 5, Evidence Nos. 1 to 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff has a depth of drinking driving of the instant case, and there was no breath for about 21 years since the Plaintiff acquired a driver’s license, nor caused any particular traffic accident, and even at the time of the instant driving, the amount of drinking was not much much.

The plaintiff actively cooperatedd in the police's investigation and investigation into the drinking driving and the traffic accident of this case, and the degree of injury of the victims of the traffic accident is unfilled, and all of them agreed.

The plaintiff who works as an administrative system server manager needs to drive a motor vehicle to his/her workplace, and the plaintiff should support his/her parent and de facto spouse. In particular, his/her mother has no health.