The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 19, 2019, at around 22:35, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.161% in front of Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On October 14, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 ordinary and class 2 motorcycles) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on February 18, 2020.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, the occurrence of human and material damage, the 12-year-free driving experience, the use of a usual driving, the distance of drunk driving is only 200 meters, and the plaintiff's vehicle operation is essential, economic difficulties are experienced, and there are family members to support, considering all circumstances, such as the fact that the pertinent disposition exceeded the scope of discretionary power or abused discretionary power.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In such cases, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it shall be inside the administrative agency.