1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. (i) On August 18, 2017, the Plaintiff driven a car with B in the highest alcohol level of 0.147% under the influence of alcohol level around 21:42 on August 18, 2017, even before the head elementary school located in the GS convenience store located in the Gongdo-Eup, the Plaintiff driven approximately 1km in front of the head elementary school located in the safe city of Ansan-do-Eup.

B. On August 28, 2017, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to the Plaintiff on the grounds of Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, which revoked the driver’s license (Class I common).

Article 22(1) of the former Administrative Appeals Commission Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20100, Nov. 1, 2017).

【Fact-finding without dispute over the ground for recognition, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 4 through 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant disposition is unlawful since it abused the discretion, considering the following: (i) whether the instant disposition is legitimate; (ii) whether the Plaintiff drinks alcohol and has no clear and time so that the Plaintiff was engaged in a drunk driving; and (iii) the Plaintiff is an employee with extension and implements on the vehicle and is engaged in a daily-service work; and (iv) the Plaintiff is required to obtain a driver’s license for family life, it is necessary to do so.

According to Article 93(1)1 of the Luxembourg Road Traffic Act and Article 91(1)28 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the time when a person drives under the influence of alcohol (not less than 0.1% of blood alcohol concentration) shall be determined based on the revocation of the license, and the disposal penalty points may be mitigated to 110 points for “a person who is an important means to maintain his family’s livelihood or is engaged in transportation service for not less than three years at the time of the disposition as an exemplary driver, or who has received an official commendation from the chief of a police station or higher by causing a traffic accident and arresting an escape driver and does not meet the specified exclusion requirements.” One of the requirements for the exclusion of mitigation, the blood alcohol concentration exceeds 0.12%.