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 August 9, 2019, at around 03:00, the Plaintiff driven a BN-ro car while under the influence of alcohol of 0.098%, and 100 meters from the D convenience E in North-gu, North-gu, North Korea at the port to the next parking lot located in F at the F.

B. On August 27, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license stated in the purport of the claim against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08% (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on November 12, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion was that the distance from which the plaintiff driven a drinking beverage was short of 100 meters and did not cause any accident, and that the plaintiff was subject to the suspension of a driver's license in 198, but there was no previous disposition of drinking for about 21 years since then, although the plaintiff was under the suspension of a driver's license, the plaintiff was in the consignment transport service at low level, and the plaintiff was unable to drive the vehicle due to the instant disposition at night, and was retired from the consignment company around September 2019, and became unable to operate the vehicle due to age and physical defects. Accordingly, upon revocation of a driver's license, it is obvious that the plaintiff's employment would become more difficult, and there was no way for the plaintiff to maintain the livelihood of the plaintiff and his family, since the plaintiff was responsible for a large amount of debt, and the principal and interest should be repaid. Thus, the disposition of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of discretionary power because it is too harsh to the plaintiff.

B. Determination 1 punitive administrative disposition is socially accepted.