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 January 16, 201, the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.092% of alcohol level.

B. After that, at around 04:19 on May 1, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at a 0.059% of alcohol level, was driving a B leraber sports car, and driving at a 150-meter level from the front road of Gangnam-gu Seoul to the front road of the D building.

C. On May 26, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking Class I ordinary and Class II driver's licenses to the Plaintiff on May 26, 2020, on the ground that the Plaintiff had a history of drinking alcohol driving again (hereinafter "the instant disposition"). D.

The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on August 18, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. At the time of the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff driven a short distance to call a substitute engineer on a very large way after drinking with his natives, the Plaintiff’s drinking operation did not cause any personal or material damage, the Plaintiff’s refusal to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the Plaintiff’s refusal to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the Plaintiff’s revocation of the driver’s license due to the relationship with the need to have the same sex at all times on duty because there are many cases of emergency call in the new wall as a doctor, it is difficult to perform his/her duties and it is at the place where the performance of his/her duties is impossible, and the Plaintiff’s use of the vehicle is necessary to move because it is difficult for the Plaintiff to move the vehicle by cutting down the left side of his/her mouth and making it difficult for him/her to move the operation. In light of the above, the instant disposition should be revoked because it is excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, constitutes an abuse of discretionary power.

B. The proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act shall be determined.