1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On September 16, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license as of October 14, 2014 on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a D car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.103% on the front of the Daegu Northern-gu Seoul Northern-gu B on September 4, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a D car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.103%.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion is serving as a motor vehicle maintenance instructor at the E-Vocational School and works as a parking manager at night, so it is necessary to obtain a driver’s license in terms of occupation, making it difficult to maintain his/her livelihood when the driver’s license is revoked, making a driver with approximately 10-meter driver’s license to find a substitute driver sent out at the time of the instant drunk driving, and the blood alcohol level of 0.103% is within the error range of the alcohol measuring instrument, and is against the depth of the instant drunk driving, etc., the instant disposition is against the Plaintiff’s disadvantage compared to the needs of public interest, and thus, it is unlawful as it exceeds the discretionary authority.

B. The need to strictly observe traffic regulations according to the reduction of traffic conditions is increasing as the number of vehicles rapidly increase today and the number of driver's licenses are issued in large volume. In particular, traffic accidents caused by drunk driving are frequently frequently and the results are harsh, so it is very important for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving. Therefore, in the revocation of driver's licenses on the grounds of drunk driving, unlike the cancellation of ordinary beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation.