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 October 17, 2018, at around 22:45, the Plaintiff driven a D car while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.201% at the section of about 2km from the Do in front of the Gu-si Village B to the front of the Gu-si apartment of the Gu-si, Gu-si.

B. On November 2, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class I ordinary) on the ground of the foregoing drunk driving pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On November 12, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on December 11, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A, Nos. 7, 8, and 1 to 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff did not have been punished for driving under the influence of alcohol before driving under the influence of alcohol, and has used the substitute driving under the influence of alcohol.

The plaintiff was involved in the company ceremony at the time and was driving in order to get out of the revolving place.

The plaintiff did not cause a traffic accident due to drinking driving of the case.

The plaintiff is mainly responsible for transporting materials and experimental tools to the construction site office in the workplace, and the driver's license is essential for performing his/her duties.

When a driver's license is revoked, he/she shall resign from the current business and shall not be re-employed in a similar type of business.

The plaintiff supports mother-child and female-child, and is also economically difficult.

Considering the above circumstances, the instant disposition was unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, the substance of the offense as the ground for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto.