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

A. On November 23, 2018, 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 0.121% of the blood alcohol content on November 9, 2018, driven B car on the street in front of the building of the Sungsan-gu, Sungwon-gu, Sungwon-si, the Plaintiff driven the same D car from the street in front of the building of the same Gu to the upper street in front of the building.”

B. On January 17, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on February 19, 2019, the Plaintiff rendered a final judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s request.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 17, 18, Eul evidence 1, 5, 6, 7 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The instant disposition constitutes a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority by taking into account the following factors: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no history of driving or traffic accident after obtaining the Plaintiff’s driver’s license; (b) a simple drinking driver; (c) a mere driving; (d) an occupation needs to be driven; and

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 0.121% of blood alcohol concentration.

(2) In addition, in full view of the fact that the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol do not peep, blood alcohol concentration, and revocation of a driver’s license is able to obtain a license again after a certain period of time, the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period.