1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 7, 2017, around 08:10, the Plaintiff driven B car cnife under the influence of alcohol by 0.162% at a point of 407 km (YananIC direction) the upper along the Cnife-dong Gyeongdong-gu Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”).

B. On August 17, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class I ordinary) 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 on September 14, 2017, but was dismissed on October 24, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 4 through 10, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion of drinking alcohol had been made to operate a bitco directly after about 3 hours in the vehicle, and that the vehicle was essential to operate due to a large number of external business trips in the occupation (or entertainment planning agency), and that there is economic difficulties, the instant disposition was exceeded the scope of discretion or abused discretion.

B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretion 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 ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts, and the legality of the disposition is not only the above criteria for disposition, but also the relevant laws