1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. Around 00:35 on June 17, 2017, the Plaintiff holding a Class I ordinary driver’s license driving a B car on the front side of the 72 Hyundai Sea-ro, Seo-gu, Gwangju, under the influence of alcohol level of 0.145%.

B. On June 28, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class I ordinary driver’s license on the ground of the above drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on October 17, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Comprehensively taking account of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s substitute engineer was exposed to driving for a period of five years, there was no personal and material damage, the time of driving under the influence of alcohol, and the fact that the license cannot be conducted when the license is revoked due to the preparation for employment, etc., the instant disposition is more unfavorable than the public interest that may be gained due to the instant disposition, and thus, the instant disposition was deviates from and abused the discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. 1) Determination of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms should be made by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual as well as the disposition by objectively examining the content of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, as well as all the relevant circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000). If the disposition standards are prescribed by Presidential Decree or Ordinance of the Ministry, the disposition standards per se are not in conformity with the Constitution or law, or are in line with the disposition standards,