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

A. On November 12, 2018, the Plaintiff holding a Class I driver’s license, Class I driver’s license, and Class I driver’s license for large-scale vehicles was under the influence of 0.122% of blood alcohol level at the front of C Hospital located in C Hospital B in Singing Water-si B, and was under the influence of 0.122% of blood alcohol level, and was under the control of the police.

B. On December 12, 2018, the Defendant notified the revocation of the Plaintiff’s above driver’s license on the ground of the above drunk driving.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). C.

On January 7, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling of dismissal on February 19, 2019.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, Eul's 1 through 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On the day of the Plaintiff’s argument, around 22:00, the F tag located in E had a meeting of friendship with a friendship leader at home, and the head of the agency had left the door and left the door, but it is difficult to keep him/her out of the door, and the head of the agency has been controlled by 30 meters inevitably, and the vehicle is a simple drinking driver, and on April 1, 2003, the vehicle was operated after leaving the vehicle at the truck company, and the vehicle was scrapped on October 2018 and purchased the previous vehicle, and the vehicle was revoked due to drinking, not only would the livelihood would be prevented, but also the debt (90 million won) in which the individual rehabilitation was received, in full view of the fact that annoyer as the head of 21 male and female is the most support for his/her her sons, her wifes, and his/her her her sons. The instant disposition of abuse of discretion is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is public interest by objectively examining the content of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the disposition in question, and all other relevant circumstances.