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

A. On March 1, 2018, the Plaintiff holding a Class I driver’s license for large vehicles, Class I ordinary vehicles, and Class II ordinary vehicles is subject to a disposition of suspension of driver’s license for a motor vehicle driving license for 110 days from the Defendant (from May 27, 2018 to September 13, 2018) on the ground that the Plaintiff, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.053 percent in blood, caused a traffic accident that inflicts physical damage.

B. However, around 17:22 on June 4, 2018, the period during which the driver’s license was suspended, the Plaintiff was discovered to police officers while driving B 2 cargo vehicles on the front of the 62 locked-ro Seoul Songpa-ro.

C. Accordingly, on July 3, 2018, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s Class I large, Class I ordinary, and Class II ordinary driver’s license by applying Article 93(1)19 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle during the suspension period of driver’s license.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on July 10, 2018, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the decision on August 14, 2018.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 1 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

가. 원고의 주장 깊이 반성하면서 수사에 적극 협조한 점, 사고를 야기하지는 아니한 점, 임시면허 기간(40일, 종료일 2018. 5. 26.)을 깜빡 잊고 운전을 하게 된 점, C시장 배달원으로 근무하면서 차량에 각종 화환, 화분, 꽃을 싣고 전국 각지로 배송하는 업무를 담당하고 있어 운전면허가 반드시 필요한 점, 이혼 후 혼자 생활하면서 5,900만 원 부채 상환 중에 있어 만일 운전면허가 취소되면 빚을 상환할 수 없으며 생계도 막연하게 되는 점, 운전면허를 취득한 이래 21년 동안 사고 없이 모범운전을 해 온 점 등을 종합하면, 이 사건 처분으로 인해 얻게 될 공익보다 침해되는 불이익이 더 크므로, 이...